People Power
Ethanol has taken its lumps in recent months, after Congress blessed it with mandates in 2005 and 2007, but if you are looking for a low carbon, Middle East independent, sustainably produced bio-fuel, it is going to be hard to beat cellulosic ethanol. Now, there's a new reason to prefer ethanol made from switchgrass and other biomass: it inflicts less harm than comparable corn ethanol mixtures. It emits smaller amounts of fine particulate matter, according to a new study from researchers at the University of Minnesota.
Researchers compared the total environmental and health costs of producing corn-based and cellulosic fuels, primarily studying their impact on air pollution and air quality. They estimated the health costs represent about 71 cents per gallon of gasoline burned. Corn-ethanol fuel carries additional cost of between 72 cents to $1.45, depending on how it is made. Cellulosic ethanol by comparison clocks in between 19 cents to 32 cents, again depending on how it is made.
"Our work highlights the need to expand the biofuels debate beyond its current focus on climate change to include a wider range of effects such as their impacts on air quality," said lead author Jason Hill, a resident fellow in the University of Minnesota's Institute on the Environment.
Another plus the authors don’t mention: cellulosic biofuels require less intensive cultivation than monoculture corn and thus produce less fertilizer and pesticide runoff into rivers and lakes.
As the study's authors point out, those are costs borne not by producers or consumers of the fuels, but by the public. Another reason why lawmakers in Washington need to put R&D money not just into bio-fuels, but into the right types of bio-fuels.
