Zeno Swijtink
07-13-2010, 11:48 AM
Ecological Economics
Volume 69, Issue 9, 15 July 2010, Page 1885
doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.04.010*|*How to Cite or Link Using DOI
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Book Review
Wim Soetaert and Eric J. Vandamme, Editors, Biofuels, Wiley Publishers (2009) ISBN:0470026774X, 256 pp.
Reviewer: David Pimentel, Professor of Ecology and Agricultural Sciences, College of Agriculture, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, United States
Received 17 March 2010.* Available online 13 May 2010.
BIOFUELS edited by W. Soetaert and E.J. Vandamme presents an optimistic perspective of biofuel production today and for the future. There is little question that the world is running out of oil, natural gas, and coal, especially oil and natural gas. The U.S. Department of Energy and others project that the world will be out of oil by approximately 2040 — not long in the future. As the authors point out clearly and emphasize, we have a very short period of time to replace our major fossil energy support systems that include the oil and natural gas. At present the only substitute sources for liquid fuels are ethanol from corn and sugarcane and biodiesel from soybeans and rapeseed. From $30 to $50 billion dollars per year are being invested by governments and businesses to subsidize the conversion of food crops into biofuels.
The use of food crops has prompted the Director General of the United Nations, Director General of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, and the President of the World Bank to warn that the programs and policies of converting food into biofuels are already increasing world starvation. Indeed the World Health Organization has recently reported that nearly 60% of the world population are currently malnourished. In addition, the Food and Agricultural Organization reported that the number of people who are protein/calorie malnourished has increased to more than 1*billion people in the world. How much of this increase is due to the conversion of food into biofuels was not reported.
There are some serious errors in the volume. For example, in Chapter 1, it is reported that on a “dry weight basis, renewable agricultural resources cost about half as much as comparable fossil resources”. In the first example in Table*3 the authors compare petroleum and corn. The authors compare 400*Euros of petroleum that actually contain 5000 times more energy as BTU's than the 150*Euros of corn as BTU's as reported on page 3. Clearly comparing energy in petroleum to the energy in corn grain results in a serious error.
Additional questions are present in this chapter where the authors report that a USDA/DOE study reported that nearly 1*billion tons of biomass would be available for conversion into bioenergy and biobased products. What the authors neglected to report is that 1*billion tons represent nearly two thirds of the total biomass produced in the U.S. annually. A total of 900*million tons of crops are produced each year for food. I am sure that the USDA/DOE were not proposing to convert all food crops into bioenergy. The total biomass produced in the U.S. annually is 1.8*billion tons. The green plants, including crops, collect on average only 0.1% of the solar energy reaching the plants. This is not to be critical of our green plants, they have been very successful for more than 1*billion years. Consider the contrast to photovoltaics that collect 15% of the solar energy and convert it into electrical energy. Thus, photovoltaics is 150 times more efficient than our green plants in collecting solar energy.
Also in Chapter 1, the contributors report that cellulosic biomass or agricultural residues can produce 65*gallons of ethanol per ton of dry biomass. To date this is unproven because no one can produce net ethanol from cellulosic biomass. This is the reason that there is not a single commercial plant in the world producing ethanol commercially from cellulosic biomass.
Another contributor is correct on the conversion of cellulosic biomass into ethanol, reporting that “much depends on the successful commercialization of cellulosic ethanol production”.
Conventional pelletization of biomass is another option. The use of biomass, like wood as pellets, and the thermal production of energy have merit. The U.S. is currently producing about 3% of its total energy usage as heat energy from waste wood from lumber mills, paper production facilities, and furniture factories. Although 3% does not sound like much, it represents the same amount of energy that the U.S. obtains from its hydroelectric plants.
Other contributors discuss the potential of producing alternative biodiesel through the conversion of waste frying and cooking oils. This is a sound approach that is being developed worldwide. The prime difficulty is the limited amount of waste cooking oil available for conversion. Several “do-it-yourself” investigators have been collecting waste oil on their own, cleaning it up to use in their personal automobile. In some instances, these private investigators are able to obtain this cooking oil for free.
The conversion of biomass, such as cow manure, into biogas has merit. Like many fuel conversion strategies, optimal conditions are needed for this conversion to be profitable. As the authors report, it takes 25*tons of wet biomass or cow manure to produce 25*m3 of biogas or the equivalent of 25*gallons of gasoline, or 1*ton of manure for 1*gallon of gasoline. Some investigators in India are promoting biogas production for individual families. However, a family would need 5 to 6 heads of cattle to produce sufficient biogas just for the family's cooking. Few Indian families are sufficiently wealthy to have 5 or 6 heads of cattle to collect and convert manure into biogas.
Biofuels are and can contribute to the energy needs of the world. We need assessments to examine the data that are available to help guide the public and decision makers. However, great care is needed to utilize the most credible and most up-to-date data available in making these assessments.
Despite some deficiencies there is valuable information in this volume on biomass use in biofuels. I am sure that investigators, biotechnologists, engineers, agriculturists, agronomists, biologists, environmentalists, economists, and others will find this volume of interest.
Ecological Economics
Volume 69, Issue 9, 15 July 2010, Page 1885
Volume 69, Issue 9, 15 July 2010, Page 1885
doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.04.010*|*How to Cite or Link Using DOI
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Book Review
Wim Soetaert and Eric J. Vandamme, Editors, Biofuels, Wiley Publishers (2009) ISBN:0470026774X, 256 pp.
Reviewer: David Pimentel, Professor of Ecology and Agricultural Sciences, College of Agriculture, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 14853, United States
Received 17 March 2010.* Available online 13 May 2010.
BIOFUELS edited by W. Soetaert and E.J. Vandamme presents an optimistic perspective of biofuel production today and for the future. There is little question that the world is running out of oil, natural gas, and coal, especially oil and natural gas. The U.S. Department of Energy and others project that the world will be out of oil by approximately 2040 — not long in the future. As the authors point out clearly and emphasize, we have a very short period of time to replace our major fossil energy support systems that include the oil and natural gas. At present the only substitute sources for liquid fuels are ethanol from corn and sugarcane and biodiesel from soybeans and rapeseed. From $30 to $50 billion dollars per year are being invested by governments and businesses to subsidize the conversion of food crops into biofuels.
The use of food crops has prompted the Director General of the United Nations, Director General of the Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations, and the President of the World Bank to warn that the programs and policies of converting food into biofuels are already increasing world starvation. Indeed the World Health Organization has recently reported that nearly 60% of the world population are currently malnourished. In addition, the Food and Agricultural Organization reported that the number of people who are protein/calorie malnourished has increased to more than 1*billion people in the world. How much of this increase is due to the conversion of food into biofuels was not reported.
There are some serious errors in the volume. For example, in Chapter 1, it is reported that on a “dry weight basis, renewable agricultural resources cost about half as much as comparable fossil resources”. In the first example in Table*3 the authors compare petroleum and corn. The authors compare 400*Euros of petroleum that actually contain 5000 times more energy as BTU's than the 150*Euros of corn as BTU's as reported on page 3. Clearly comparing energy in petroleum to the energy in corn grain results in a serious error.
Additional questions are present in this chapter where the authors report that a USDA/DOE study reported that nearly 1*billion tons of biomass would be available for conversion into bioenergy and biobased products. What the authors neglected to report is that 1*billion tons represent nearly two thirds of the total biomass produced in the U.S. annually. A total of 900*million tons of crops are produced each year for food. I am sure that the USDA/DOE were not proposing to convert all food crops into bioenergy. The total biomass produced in the U.S. annually is 1.8*billion tons. The green plants, including crops, collect on average only 0.1% of the solar energy reaching the plants. This is not to be critical of our green plants, they have been very successful for more than 1*billion years. Consider the contrast to photovoltaics that collect 15% of the solar energy and convert it into electrical energy. Thus, photovoltaics is 150 times more efficient than our green plants in collecting solar energy.
Also in Chapter 1, the contributors report that cellulosic biomass or agricultural residues can produce 65*gallons of ethanol per ton of dry biomass. To date this is unproven because no one can produce net ethanol from cellulosic biomass. This is the reason that there is not a single commercial plant in the world producing ethanol commercially from cellulosic biomass.
Another contributor is correct on the conversion of cellulosic biomass into ethanol, reporting that “much depends on the successful commercialization of cellulosic ethanol production”.
Conventional pelletization of biomass is another option. The use of biomass, like wood as pellets, and the thermal production of energy have merit. The U.S. is currently producing about 3% of its total energy usage as heat energy from waste wood from lumber mills, paper production facilities, and furniture factories. Although 3% does not sound like much, it represents the same amount of energy that the U.S. obtains from its hydroelectric plants.
Other contributors discuss the potential of producing alternative biodiesel through the conversion of waste frying and cooking oils. This is a sound approach that is being developed worldwide. The prime difficulty is the limited amount of waste cooking oil available for conversion. Several “do-it-yourself” investigators have been collecting waste oil on their own, cleaning it up to use in their personal automobile. In some instances, these private investigators are able to obtain this cooking oil for free.
The conversion of biomass, such as cow manure, into biogas has merit. Like many fuel conversion strategies, optimal conditions are needed for this conversion to be profitable. As the authors report, it takes 25*tons of wet biomass or cow manure to produce 25*m3 of biogas or the equivalent of 25*gallons of gasoline, or 1*ton of manure for 1*gallon of gasoline. Some investigators in India are promoting biogas production for individual families. However, a family would need 5 to 6 heads of cattle to produce sufficient biogas just for the family's cooking. Few Indian families are sufficiently wealthy to have 5 or 6 heads of cattle to collect and convert manure into biogas.
Biofuels are and can contribute to the energy needs of the world. We need assessments to examine the data that are available to help guide the public and decision makers. However, great care is needed to utilize the most credible and most up-to-date data available in making these assessments.
Despite some deficiencies there is valuable information in this volume on biomass use in biofuels. I am sure that investigators, biotechnologists, engineers, agriculturists, agronomists, biologists, environmentalists, economists, and others will find this volume of interest.
Ecological Economics
Volume 69, Issue 9, 15 July 2010, Page 1885