THE BENEFIT AND HARM ASSOCIATED WITH BIO-FUELS

THE

BENEFIT AND HARM

ASSOCIATED WITH

BIO-FUELS

By NZOM IGNATIUS CHIBEZE G.

2010

De-Makers [email protected]

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 2

ABSTRACT

Recent developments on the use of sugarcane, Sweet

sorghum, soybean, sunflower, vegetable oil, jatropha e.t.c. as

sources of biofuels to provide fuel for the transportation

sector and other sectors, have shown the possibility to

obtain good performing fuel that is environmentally friendly.

It has become very imperative for an alternative source of fuel, owing

to the rising cost of crude and more importantly the greenhouse gas

emission programme. Biofuel are mainly derived from biomass or bio

waste. These fuels can be used for any purposes, but the main use

for which they have to be brought is in the transportation sector. Most

of the vehicles require fuels which provide high power and are dense

so that storage is easier. These engines require fuels that are clean

and in the liquid form.

The substitution of fossil fuels with biofuels has been proposed in the

European Union (EU) as part of a strategy to mitigate greenhouse

gas emissions from road transport, increase security of energy supply

and support development of rural communities. In this paper, our

emphasis will be on the benefits and harms associated with Biofuels

and its advancement which is treated as second and third generation

biofuels.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 3

TABLE OF CONTENT

Abstract

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

1.0.0 Biofuel……………………………………………………………4 1.1.0 Ethanol…………………………………………………………..5 1.2.0 Biodiesel…………………………………………………………6 1.3.0 Pollution from biofuel processing operations………………..8 1.4.0 Biofuel feedstock constrains…………………………………..8 1.5.0 The importance of biofuel……………………………………...8 CHAPTER TWO: Potential Biofuel Sources

2.1.0 Bioethanol crops……………………………………………….10 2.2.0 Advantages of diversifying feedstocks for bioethanol……...16 2.3.0 Biodiesel crops………………………………………………….18

CHAPTER THREE : The good and bad of biofuels

3.1.0 Biofuels in-relation to small farmers………………………….22 3.2.0 Problems with the current situation of biofuels……………...22 3.3.0 Towards a new policy………………………………………….24

CHAPTER FOUR: Advancement in biofuels

4.1.0 Second generation biofuels……………………………………30 4.2.0 Third generation biofuels………………………………………31 4.3.0 The potential of Advanced biofuels…………………………..33 4.4.0 Future role of biofuels………………………………………….34 CONCLUSION

REFERENCES

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 4

INTRODUCTION

The topic of biofuels has drawn increased interest worldwide in the

wake of steeply-climbing fossil fuel prices in 2005-06. In late

2006/early 2007 prices began to subside, but are unlikely to return to

their former levels. The painful experience of national economies at

the mercy of decisions taken far from their shores left a lasting

impression on policymakers, and many nations now have a strong

desire to increase energy self-reliance.

At the same time, nations are coming to an increasing realization of

the enormity of the threat of global warming. Policymakers have as a

result also gained interest in the potential of biofuels to help reduce

carbon emissions that contribute to global warming.

Though much experience has been gained and some very promising

results have emerged that can be up-scaled now, it is also clear that

the biofuels revolution is at a nascent stage; more research and

development work are essential to confirm and fulfill the potential of

this pro-poor approach.

ICRISAT‘s (International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid

Tropics ) interest in biofuels relates mainly to their possible benefits,

and risks that the biofuels revolution might bring to the rural poor who

live in the dryland areas of the tropical latitudes across the developing

world.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 5

1.0.0 BIOFUEL

The term Biofuel is used to describe the liquid, solid and gas fuels

produced from Biomass that is, plant material or animal waste, to be

used in transportation, heating or energy production.

Since Biomass can be replenished readily, biofuels are a renewable

source of energy, unlike fossil fuels, such as petroleum, coal, and

natural gas. Some long exploited biofuels, such as wood, can be

used directly as a raw material that is burned to produce heat. The

heat, in turn, can be used to run generators in a power plant to

produce electricity. A number of existing power facilities burn grass,

wood, or other kinds of biomass.

Biofuels are made by converting various forms of biomass such as

corn or animal fat into liquid fuels and can be used as replacements

or additives for gasoline or diesel.

Biofuels generally have lower life-cycle carbon dioxide emissions

than do their fossil fuel counterparts. In recent years, several

developed countries new Federal laws designed to increase the

production and consumption of domestic biofuels have been enacted.

Example; The Energy Policy Act of 2005 established the Renewable

Fuel Standard, which mandated that transportation fuels sold in the

United States contain a minimum volume of renewable fuels, the level

of which increases yearly until 2022. In December 2007, the Energy

Independence and Security Act of 2007 increased the mandatory

levels of renewable fuel blending credits to a total of 36 billion gallons

by 2022, including 16 billion gallons of cellulosic biofuels.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 6

1.1.0 Ethanol

Ethanol is a clear, colorless alcohol—the same as is found in

alcoholic beverages. In fact, ethanol is produced when yeast

ferments sugar in a process similar to that used to produce beer.

Ethanol can be made from the starches or sugars found in various

agricultural crops, such as corn, barley, and sugar cane, or from

cellulosic residues from woody biomass, such as bark or switch

grass. Cellulosic ethanol is considered an ―advanced‖ biofuel and

involves a more complicated production process than conventional

ethanol made from starches or sugars; however, its commercial

viability has yet to be demonstrated.

1.1.1 Ethanol Usage

Initially, gasoline sold in certain geographic areas was required to

contain oxygen, which helps the fuel mixture combust more

completely. Originally, a chemical called methyl tertiary butyl ether

(MTBE) was the preferred oxygenate, but it was phased out due to

concerns about seepage into groundwater and ethanol was

mandated as a replacement. The usage of ethanol also gained

market share due to the Renewable Fuel Standard requirements.

Today, a little more than half of the gasoline has some amount of

ethanol blended into it, and these blends are named by their ethanol

content: for example, a blend of 90% gasoline and 10% ethanol (by

volume) is known as E10.

However, because ethanol contains approximately 67% the energy

content of gasoline per gallon, usage of ethanol blends results in

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 7

decreased gas mileage. Despite this reduced gas mileage, high

crude oil prices and government incentives have resulted in the

consumption of increasing amounts of ethanol. While almost any

regular gasoline car can run on blends of ethanol up to E10, special

cars known as ―flex-fuel‖ vehicles are required for use of blends

above E10. Flex-fueled vehicles are currently available from every

major American automobile manufacturer and are almost identical to

regular gasoline vehicles, except for a few modifications to the fuel

system and minor engine components. On a mass production basis,

it costs less than $200 extra per car to make a flex-fuel automobile

compared with a conventional gasoline vehicle.

Ethanol is expected to play a major role in helping to reach the

annual minimum renewable fuel consumption required by the

Renewable Fuel Standard.

1.2.0 Biodiesel

Biodiesel consists of chemicals known as fatty acid methyl esters

(FAME) that can be used as a diesel fuel substitute or diesel fuel

additive. Biodiesel is typically made from oils produced from

agricultural crops such as soybeans but can also be made from

various other feedstocks such as animal fats.

Currently, most biodiesel is produced from soybean oil, but recent

increases in soybean crop prices have caused producers to switch to

other feedstocks such as waste animal fats from processing plants or

recycled grease from restaurants. Biodiesel can be made from

virtually any feedstock that contains an adequate amount of free fatty

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 8

acids, which are the raw materials that are converted to biodiesel

through a chemical process.

Research is underway to harvest algae for biodiesel production

because they contain fat pockets that help them float, and this fat can

be collected and processed into biodiesel.

In addition to biodiesel derived from FAME, it is also possible to make

a diesel fuel substitute from cellulosic material. This fuel, sometimes

called renewable diesel, would also count towards meeting the

Renewable Fuel Standard mandate. Like cellulosic ethanol, however,

its commercial viability has yet to be demonstrated.

1.2.1 Biodiesel Usage

Biodiesel has chemical characteristics much like petroleum-based

diesel and, therefore, can be used as a direct substitute for diesel fuel

or blended with petroleum diesel in any percentage without suffering

any significant loss of fuel economy. Blends are named in the same

manner as ethanol-gasoline blends, for example, a blend of 20%

biodiesel with 80% petroleum diesel is known as B20. Low level, i.e.,

B2-B5, biodiesel blends are a popular fuel in the trucking industry

because biodiesel has excellent lubricating properties, and therefore

usage of the blends can be beneficial for engine performance.

Biodiesel also has virtually no sulfur content, making it a popular

additive for low- and ultra-low-sulfur diesel fuels required by the

Environmental Protection Agency.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 9

1.3.0 Pollution from biofuel processing operations

After the fermentation process that produces ethanol, the wastewater

must be disposed of. The wastewater effluent from sweet sorghum-

based ethanol production is less polluting than that from sugarcane

molasses, having 1/4th

of biological oxygen demand (BOD; 19,500 mg

liter-1

) and lower chemical oxygen demand (COD; 38,640 mg liter-1

),

according to the results of a pilot study conducted by Vasanthadada

Sugar Institute (VSI).

1.4.0 Biofuel feedstock constraints

In some countries, molasses from sugarcane are currently the main

feedstock for producing bioethanol. However, quantities are

insufficient and the supply is not reliable enough to keep processing

plants running efficiently. There is a need for alternative feedstock

sources such as sorghum and starchy tuberous roots such as

cassava

In countries like India, human food demand for food and feed oilseed

crops (e.g. soybean, sunflower) exceeds supply, so it is not desirable

to divert large quantities of these crops for biodiesel. However large

wasteland areas are available that might be cultivated with non-

conventional oilseed species that are not eaten by humans but can

withstand such rugged conditions, for example Pongamia and

Jatropha.

1.5.0 The Importance of Biofuel:

a. Renewable source. b. Energy security. c. Availability for all countries. d. Absence of harmful burning emissions.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 10

Table 1.0: Biofuel blending targets, selected countries

COUNTRY FEEDSTOCKS BLENDING TARGET

ETHANOL BIODIESEL

Brazil sugarcane, soybeans,

palm oil

castor seed

25 percent blending ratio of ethanol with

gasoline (E25) in 2007; 2 percent blend of

biodiesel with diesel (B2) in early 2008, 5

percent by 2013.

Canada

corn, wheat, straw

animal fat,

vegetable oils

5 percent ethanol content in gasoline by 2010;2

percent biodiesel in diesel by 2012.

China

corn, wheat, cassava,

sweet sorghum

used and

imported

vegetable oils,

jatropha

Five provinces use 10 percent ethanol blend

with gasoline; five more provinces targeted for

expanded use.

EU

wheat, other grains,

sugar beets, wine,

alcohol

rapeseed,

sunflower,

soybeans

5.75 percent biofuel share of transportation fuel

by 2010, 10 percent by 2020.

India

molasses, sugarcane

jatropha,

imported

palm oil

10 percent blending of ethanol in gasoline by

late 2008, 5 percent biodiesel blend by 2012.

Indonesia sugarcane, cassava palm oil, jatropha 10 percent biofuel by 2010.

Malaysia

none

palm oil

5 percent biodiesel blend used in public

vehicles; government plans to mandate B5 in

diesel-consuming vehicles and in industry in

the near future.

Thailand

molasses, cassava,

sugarcane

palm oil, used

vegetable oil

Plans call for E10 consumption to double by

2011 through use of price incentives; palm oil

production will be increased to replace 10

percent of total diesel demand by 2012.

United

States

primarily corn

soybeans, other

oilseeds, animal

fats,recycled fats

and oil

Use of 7.5 billion gallons of biofuels by 2012;

Proposals to raise renewable fuel standard to

36 billion gallons (mostly from corn and

cellulose) by 2022.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 11

Chapter Two

Potential Biofuel Sources

2.1.0 Bioethanol Crops

2.1.1 Sugarcane

Sugarcane is not studied by ICRISAT (International Crops Research

Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics) because it is a crop grown under

irrigation in wetter areas, and often by wealthier farmers. But

molasses derived from sugarcane processing are currently the main

feedstock for bioethanol in some countries such as India, so useful

lessons can be learned from a comparative analysis.

Molasses are a by-product from sugar production for ethanol

production. The bioethanol industry buys its molasses feedstock from

the sugar factories. Sugar is the main objective of the sugarcane

industry; molasses are simply a byproduct. As such, the unreliability

of supply of molasses is a major constraint to biofuels development

based on this feedstock.

India‘s Federal Government subsidizes sugar production, as do many

nations (including the USA), through a minimum cane price

announced each year. In addition, state governments also declare

advisory prices which are either the same or higher than the Federal

price. Sugar factories buy sugarcane at the state advisory price and

often offer even higher prices if supply is tight or for high-quality cane.

These subsidies also indirectly benefit the competitive position of

molasses as a bioethanol feedstock.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 12

Some of the sugar mills are cooperatives in which the farmers also

hold ownership shares in the factory. The arrangement is a variant of

contract farming, where some factories provide technical guidance on

crop production and also arrange for credit for inputs and other

support services. Such loans operate through banks based on a

triangular arrangement where the industry will repay the loan and

recover the amount due from the farmer.

Given the assured market for sugar in the form of the guaranteed

price, small farmers are able to participate in sugarcane production

without undue risk. However they must have access to irrigation to be

competitive, and irrigation is becoming increasingly difficult and

expensive due to growing water scarcity and cost (due to overdrafting

of groundwater, full exploitation of surface water or increasing costs

of surface water development, etc.).

There are a number of special issues related to sugarcane including

strong lobby groups and historical subsidy momentum. These lobbies

are directed towards sugar, rather than towards the byproduct

industry of molasses for bioethanol at present.

2.1.2 Sweet sorghum

In recent years, juice from sweet sorghum (Sorghum bicolor) stalks is

emerging as a viable source for bioethanol production . Sweet

sorghum is similar in appearance and agronomic performance to

grain sorghum. It grows rapidly, is photosynthetically efficient due to

its C4 metabolism, and is widely adaptable. The difference is that

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 13

sweet sorghum stores much of its photosynthate as sugar in the

stalks, although it also gives reasonable grain yields.

Normal grain sorghum is already grown on 11.7 million hectares in

dryland Asia (28% of global sorghum area) and on 23.4 million

hectares in Africa (55% of global sorghum area), and sweet sorghum

could fit into these areas, producing more biomass and grain if yield-

enhancing technologies were stimulated by biofuel market incentives.

A crop of sweet sorghum takes about 4.5 months, and can be

followed by a ratoon crop (natural second re-growth from stubble

after the first crop is harvested). Together the main and ratoon crops

require about 8,000 cubic meters (m3

) of water, whether from rainfall

or irrigation (Soltani and Almodares 1994). This is four times less

than required by one crop of sugarcane (12−16 months duration and

36,000 m3

of water per crop) (Table 2). Sweet sorghum can also be

planted from seed, which is less laborious than the stem cuttings

used to plant sugarcane, and can be more easily mechanized.

Because of this major water savings, less fertilizer, labor, and other

inputs, the cost of one hectare of sweet sorghum cultivation (main +

ratoon crop in 9 months) is 60% lower than for sugarcane (one crop

in 9-12 months). Since poor farmers are less likely to have access to

irrigation water and the capital needed to bear the cultivation costs of

sugarcane, this means that sweet sorghum is more accessible to

poor farmers in less water-endowed areas.

Even though the ethanol yield per unit weight of feedstock is lower for

sweet sorghum (see footnote to Table 2.0), the much lower

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 14

production cost for this crop more than compensates, so that on the

bottom line sweet sorghum still ends up with a competitive cost

advantage (US$0.29 cost to produce one liter of ethanol from sweet

sorghum, versus US$0.33 for ethanol from sugarcane — Rao et al.

2004). These costs of course will vary somewhat depending on a

range of local production factors.

Table 2.0: Sweet sorghum and sugarcane cultivation requirements

and potential ethanol yields.

Parameter Sweet

sorghum

Sugarcane

Duration (months) 4 12

No. of crops year-1

2 1

Water required year-1

8,000m3

36,000m3

Cane yield (t ha-1

year-1

) 40+25 75

Grain (t ha-1

year-1

) 1+2 -

Ethanol from cane (kl ha-1

year-1

) 2.6 5.6

Ethanol from grain (kl ha-1

year-1

) 1.1 -

Cost of cultivation (US$ ha-1

year-1

) 400 995

Crop production cost per liter of ethanol produced

(US$)

0.11 0.18

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 15

• Processing cost assumed to be same for both the crops

• Only crop production cost considered

• Ethanol from sweet sorghum: Cane @ 40 l t-1

; grain @ 375 l t-1

• Ethanol from sugarcane: Cane @ 75 l t-1

; molasses @ 250 l t-1

(l t-1 = litres per tone)

Farmers will want to know how sweet sorghum cultivation compares

financially with their previous activity, namely the cultivation of grain

sorghum. Data suggest that the gross returns from sweet sorghum

are about 8% higher than that from grain sorghum in India (Table 2).

Of course, demand from the marketplace will be a major determinant

of this revenue advantage over time. The potential market for ethanol

feedstocks appears much larger than that for grain sorghum, because

human consumption of sorghum is declining as rice and wheat

continue to become more popular.

Table 3. Gross earnings from sweet sorghum and grain sorghum.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 16

Grain sorghum is also used to feed livestock and poultry but faces

considerable competition from maize in that space. Sweet sorghum

appears to have significant advantages over maize as a biofuels

source, whereas maize grain appears to have wider acceptance as a

livestock feed. Therefore the emergence of sweet sorghum for

ethanol, compensating for declining cultivation for food and feed, may

be a rational adjustment of the marketplace to improve overall

economic efficiency to reflect the contrasting competitive advantages

of these two crops.

Even as some countries demand for sorghum grain declines from the

macro-economic perspective, it still has an important role to play in

rural household consumption in many impoverished dryland areas. Its

stalks are also very important as fodder for cattle and goats. Here the

triple-product potential of sweet sorghum (ethanol + grain + stalks) is

a strong pro-poor advantage compared to sugarcane. In addition to

sweet stalks, grain yields of 2 to 2.5 t ha-1

can be obtained from sweet

sorghum. These grains can be used for human food or livestock feed.

The stripped leaves and chopped stalks also make excellent fodder

for cattle after the juice is extracted.

Summing up the potential pro-poor benefits of sweet sorghum

discussed in this term paper:

1. It has much lower cost of production than sugarcane, so it is

more adoptable by poor farmers;

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 17

2. It needs much less water than sugarcane — important because

the poor tend to have less access to water for irrigation or to

favored-rainfall environments;

3. Because it can be grown in drier regions with less reliable

rainfall or irrigation, it enables these very large dry regions, where

poverty is deepest, to participate in the biofuels revolution instead

of being left behind;

4. The sorghum crop has been in long-term decline due to

government subsidies for rice, corn and wheat for human

consumption; this has been reducing economic opportunities for

dryland farmers, so sweet sorghum is an important new

employment and income opportunity that can help reverse

economic recession in dry areas;

5. There is concern about the competition between biofuels vs.

food crops for land, but the declining demand for sorghum for food

and the grain yield from sweet sorghum as explained above

suggests that this will not be a major issue; on the contrary, if

farmers can make more income from sweet sorghum, they will

have more cash to be able to buy rice and wheat to eat. In other

words, sweet sorghum can help realign dryland economies by

creating a new competitive advantage relationship with other

zones that are better able to grow rice and wheat;

6. Sweet sorghum cultivation appears amenable to social

cooperation mechanisms such as contract and cooperative

farming, which can connect the poor to reliable markets supported

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 18

by the technology, infrastructure and knowledge base of the

private sector or through their own investments, creating a conduit

that will undoubtedly lead to further technical and income gains;

we see this as a strategic development pathway out of poverty.

2.2.0 Advantages of diversifying feedstocks for bioethanol

A major concern for biofuels processors is assuring a steady supply

of feedstocks so that their facilities can run at economically efficient

capacity levels year-round. The cyclical nature of crop harvests

though means that there are inevitably surges and shortages in the

availability of feedstock. The more different crops are grown, the

more options for feedstock become available because different crops

sown at different times of year and grown in different locations will

provide a more continuous stream of feedstock.

At present the industry is overly-reliant on one feedstock, sugarcane

molasses. Shortages are common, because molasses is only a

byproduct, not the main objective of sugarcane cultivation. Since

profits are higher for refined sugar, the sugarcane industry is unlikely

to reorient itself to meet the needs of the ethanol industry. Sweet

sorghum on the other hand would be mainly grown for ethanol (with

grain and stalk-fodder as valuable byproducts). This will lead to

stronger competitive position for sweet sorghum over time as the

farming community, supported by research and development

investors, focuses the system on meeting the needs of the ethanol

industry.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 19

For example, research underway now at ICRISAT to develop

photoperiod-insensitive hybrid varieties of sweet sorghum will lead to

varieties that perform better across a wider range of planting dates.

Different crop maturity durations (4-6 months) and better ratoon crop

performance (re-growth after harvest), better disease and pest

resistance, higher sugar yield, and many other features will widen the

annual availability of sweet sorghum feedstock and steadily

strengthen its competitive position.

2.3.0 Biodiesel crops

Biodiesel yields even greater reductions in air pollution than ethanol,

because fossil-fuel diesel is extremely polluting given the diesel-

DIAGRAMATIC REPREENTATION OF PRODUCING BIOFUEL

Sugar Source

Corn kernels

Cellulose

Hydrolysis

Sugar

ETHANOL

Fermentation Distillation

Drying

ETHANOL PRODUTION

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 20

engine technologies in common use in developing countries.

Compared to fossil fuel-derived diesel, biodiesel reduces unburnt

hydrocarbons by 30%, carbon monoxide by 20% and particulate

matter by 25%. Biodiesel research and development are less

advanced than for bioethanol, but deserve increased attention.

The EU is the world‘s largest producer of biodiesel, derived from

rapeseed, while in the USA soybean is the main biodiesel source. In

the tropics, biodiesel is still in the development stages, though there

is growing interest.

Biodiesel can be produced from edible oilseed crops such as

soybean, rapeseed, sunflower, as well as non-edible oilseeds from

locally cultivated plants such as jatropha (Jatropha curcas),

Pongamia (Pongamia pinnata) and Neem (Azadirachta indica). Since

research in biodiesel has been limited to date, it would be worthwhile

to investigate a wider range of species in order to maximize options

and potential for long-term progress.

Jatropha and Pongamia have attracted especial interest in the

tropics. They are inedible and can be grown on areas unsuitable for

food crops e.g. wastelands and village and field border areas,

minimizing competition with them. According to the Government of

India‘s Department of Land Resources, the country has 63.9 million

ha of wastelands that are potentially available for biodiesel crops.

2.3.1 Jatropha

Jatropha curcas belongs to the plant family Euphorbiaceae. It grows

into a shrub or small tree. Jatropha originated in Central America but

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 21

has spread across the tropics worldwide. Another economically-

important, tropical, high-oil euphorb is castor bean.

Jatropha was a plantation crop introduced into West African

Portuguese colonies in the sixteenth century. The oil was used mostly

for lighting because it produces a very clear and clean flame.

Jatropha oil can be used to light candles, for soap, and as a bio-

pesticide in addition to its biodiesel potential. The oil is toxic to

humans, but there are some non-toxic varieties. However, fossil-fuel

diesel is also toxic, and rural villagers in Africa and Asia are already

familiar with Jatropha and its toxicity risks. So this may not be a major

stumbling block.

Interest in Jatropha has been steadily growing worldwide. An

International Symposium, ―Jatropha 97‖ was held in Nicaragua in

February 1997. It summarized much of the current knowledge on

Jatropha curcas and its products.

2.3.2 Pongamia

Among the many species that can yield oil suitable for biodiesel,

Pongamia pinnata has been found to be one of the most promising.

Pongamia pinnata is a legume, belonging to the Papilionaceae plant

family. It is widely found across India, and is native to the Asian

subcontinent. As a legume it is nitrogen-fixing, which importantly

contributes to its survival on poor soils and enriches the fertility of

those soils. It is tolerant to waterlogging, saline and alkaline soils, and

it can withstand harsh climates (medium to high rainfall). It can be

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 22

planted on degraded lands, farmer‘s field boundaries, wastelands and

fallow lands.

Pongamia seeds contain 30-40% oil and are inedible by animals,

making it easier to establish in managed plantings. It is one of few

nitrogen-fixing trees that produce high oil-content seeds. It is a

medium-sized evergreen tree with a spreading crown and a short

trunk. The tree is widely planted for shade and as an ornamental in

some countries. Its natural distribution is along coasts and riverbanks.

It is also found along roadsides, canal banks and farmlands. It is a

preferred species for controlling soil erosion and binding sand dunes

because of its dense network of lateral roots. Its roots, bark, leaves,

sap, and flowers are traditionally used for medicinal purposes.

Pongamia oil can also be used for cooking fuel and lighting lamps.

The oil is also used as a lubricant, water-paint binder, pesticide, and

in soap making and tanning. The oil is used in traditional medicine to

treat rheumatism, as well as human and animal skin diseases. It is

effective in enhancing the pigmentation of skin affected by

leucoderma or scabies.

The leaves and press cake can be recycled to enhance soil fertility

since they are high in nitrogen. The press cake also has pesticidal

value, particularly against nematodes in the soil. Its dried leaves are

used as an insect repellent in stored grains.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 23

Chapter Three

THE GOOD AND BAD OF BIOFUEL

3.1.0 Biofuels In Relation To Small Famers In Developing

Countries

It has been a very aggressive cycle against small farmers and against

nature. The export of subsidized grain from the United States and the

European Union has led to the bankruptcy of the small growers form

the countries of origin and the importing countries. Large-scale

cultivation of monocrops such as soybeans in the Latin American has

spread, wiping out multifunctional farms, and its technologies have

contaminated millions of hectares of soil and water. The biofuels

boom is not just another trend or a passing fashion. It is the result of

a new global food and energy cycle that entails very significant

adjustments in our societies.

The cycle of hydrocarbons as the almost exclusive source of energy

is ending. So is the use of basic grains as a food weapon and

instrument of economic subordination, initiated with the Iran-Iraq war

in 1979, and the export of U.S. wheat to the Soviet Union a year later.

The dominant actors of this cycle have been the industrial agriculture

trans-national corporations that control the international market

through the policy of low prices.

3.2.0 Problems with the Current Situation

It has been a very aggressive cycle against small farmers and against

nature.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 24

The export of subsidized grain from the United States and the

European Union has led to the bankruptcy of the small growers form

the countries of origin and the importing countries.

Global warming, the depletion of hydrocarbons, and the growing

proportion of fossil-fuel based fuels produced in countries or

organisms outside the control of the United Status and the trans-

nationals—such as Venezuela, Iran, or Russia—have led to the need

for changes. New cycles for food and energy production are

beginning, and among these, bioenergy plays a key role.

The bioenergy cycle is an open development cycle, whose evolution

could follow several paths: it could be harnessed for restructuring

domination, as the trans-nationals and the states that support them

are attempting to do; or emerging powers could take advantage of it,

such as Brazil, Russia, India, and China or OPEC; or it could be used

by grassroots organizations of rural and indigenous people, and small

producers.

Millions and millions of hectares will be dedicated to the production of

ethanol in the United States and in the Soviet Union, withdrawing

from the international market millions of tons of corn. This will raise

global prices as well as impose serious hardship on countries that

have not developed food sovereignty.

The governments of the European Union and the United States are

fully engaged in promoting research and the cultivation of grains,

oleaginous crops, and plants from which ethanol or biodiesel can be

produced. The United States earmarked US$8.9 billion in subsidies

for the production of ethanol, and research and development of

biofuels in 2005.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 25

Mexican business and government are following suit and have begun

to promote biofuel base crops with little or no consideration of their

social, economic, and environmental impacts; without a basis in solid

research regarding the conditions of the land and agricultural food

production; and without analyzing the relationship in Mexico between

food and biofuels production: Is it complementary? Is it mutually

exclusive?

3.3.0 Toward a New Policy

Growing countries, cannot jump into promoting the massive,

extensive, and intensive production of biofuels if they don't start from

their social and historical reality, from the values that guide the

project of their nation, from the social and regional diversity of their

makeup, from their culture, better yet, from their multiculturalism, their

biodiversity, from the wealth of their natural resources.

The following are five basic criteria that should be taken into account

for the

development of biofuels in growing countries:

Food Sovereignty and Security:

Some growing countries, e.g. Mexico, has about 17 million people

living in extreme poverty and 20 million in moderate poverty for whom

corn is their main source of energy, fiber, and protein. Equally,

reducing the amount of land under cultivation for corn or allocating a

large part of the crop yield to other uses will reduce supply and raise

the price. This will affect first low- income families.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 26

Cultivating plants for the production of biofuels on a massive scale

will increase pressure on the land currently dedicated to producing

food, and make food supply even more vulnerable. Some countries,

currently depend on foreigners to provide one-fourth of their national

food consumption in corn, half of wheat, more than half of rice, and

almost 90% of our oilseeds. It would be totally irresponsible to

dedicate large land areas to the cultivation of biofuels. It would

increase scarcity of basic foods and increase vulnerability to

pressures from the countries and trans-national corporations that

control the international market. The right to food, THE BASIC FUEL

OF LIVING BEINGS, is of a higher order than the need to fuel

machines.

The Right of Rural and Indigenous Families to Land and to

Make a Living with Dignity from Agricultural Work:

The experience of nations such as Argentina, where monocrop

cultivation has been imposed by the international market, is very

clear: it implies the displacement of hundreds of thousands of small

and medium producers and their dislocation from the country to the

city.

Those who do not have the means to cultivate large farms to obtain

the benefits of an economy of scale, or who don't have the resources

needed to acquire specialized machinery or technology, find

themselves unemployed. Farmers who go into debt to acquire these

things but are then defeated by the competitiveness of big

businesses also lose their livelihoods. In places where biofuel base

crops are grown we find the same disadvantages as with monocrops

in general.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 27

Therefore, if such crops are to be promoted in Mexico, care must be

taken not to displace small producers, and rural and indigenous

peoples from their land. The State and society should guarantee

respect and no pressure on community, cooperative, and family land.

It is not just the guaranteeing of property or the possession of land,

but with the source of employment for family farmers.

Sustainability of Water:

In some country where there is serious problem with the depletion of

aquifers and the overexploitation of rivers and lakes. This problem will

increase according to climate change studies that predict larger

droughts in

the North of the country, less precipitation, reduction in the capacity

of dams, and in a decrease in the replenishment of aquifers.

Monocrop cultivation is based on intensive use of water. Companies

interested in biofuels will not use seasonally cultivated land, but will

seek out areas with irrigation because of its productivity. Except in a

few regions, where the efficient use of water systems is not

widespread. Where there is very little water in a country, and

reducing that vital and primary resource in order to produce fuel

threatens not just the sovereignty but also perhaps the viability as a

nation. The cultivation of base plants for biofuels should always be

conditioned on sustainable water management.

Sustainability of Natural Resources:

Experience has shown that, with the intensive cultivation of soybean,

oil palm, and corn show that they bring about devastation of natural

resources: clear-cutting thousands of hectares of forest and

shrubbery; pollution and depletion of soils through the use of

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 28

agricultural chemicals; loss of biodiversity induced by monocropping;

and the emission of nitrous oxide and other gases from fertilizers that

contribute to the greenhouse effect. Changes in land use, for

example, when converting previously uncultivated areas into crops,

also contribute to global warming due to the reduction in green cover

and the increased emission of carbon. Therefore, in a Developing

countrys‘ base crops for biofuels, should contribute to, not detract

from, the sustainability of natural resources.

Avoidance of Genetically Engineered Crops:

The urgency to produce ever increasing amounts of biofuels

encourages the use of genetically engineered seeds, in the case of

soybean and corn; of genetically modified trees, such as the African

palm and the genetically engineered poplar; or the development of

genetically engineered grasses. Falling into that trap raises two

threats.

1. It makes one dependent on trans-national corporations like

Monsanto (a giant chemical company), to obtain and use seed,

and requires payment on patents.

2. Even worse, is the attack on native seeds, grasses, trees, and

entire ecosystems by the intrusion of transgenic elements that can

end diversity and extinguish animal or vegetable species. It is very

imperative that critical analyses of the impart of genetically

engineered plants and seeds based biofuels be carried out before

alloying the development of such biofuels.

Community, Local, and National Control:

In developing countries who vociferously maintain their national

sovereignty over petroleum, although, most times the communities in

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 29

which oil wells are located are the last ones to benefit from oil

extraction and the first to be hurt by the environmental damage it

causes. The main promoters of biofuels production are oil companies

such as Shell and Exxon, chemical companies such as Monsanto

and Dupont, and agribusiness companies such as Cargill. As fossil

fuels have been increasingly questioned, they have repositioned

themselves to control the bioenergy field. Because of that, another

criterion for the production of biofuels in some countries is that of

national and community control. This means that trans-nationals

should not appropriate the process of their production and

distribution, but that it should remain under national control. However,

that is still not enough, given the negative experiences suffered by

communities that are "unlucky" enough to have oil resources in their

territory. It is necessary that these rural communities, with help from

the government, have mechanisms that allow them to develop and

exercise community control over the bioenergy that they produce—

they should be able to decide how to produce the energy, how much

to produce, for what use, and for whom.

Most of these criteria stem from small farm and indigenous

agricultural practices, uses, and customs in those countries. The first

aim of production is to feed the family unit and the community. In

doing so, the family is provided with a source of work, within its own

land and community, although given economic and social distortions

in many cases this livelihood is not enough for the subsistence of the

domestic unit. These practices take great care to ensure

sustainability in the way water and natural resources are used. The

reason is very simple: maintaining and even improving the

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 30

endowment of these resources is a condition for intergenerational

reproduction of the family. They almost exclusively use native seeds

and plants, which are transmitted from one generation to the next, or

domestic varieties that have been adapted by the family or

community to the climatic, soil, and moisture conditions of their land.

And finally, the fundamental decisions about what should be grown,

how it should be grown, to which market it should be aimed, and

under what conditions are not made outside the family unit or the

community.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 31

Chapter Four

Advancement In biofuel

4.0.0 Advance Biofuels: This will be discussed as Second and third generation biofuels.

4.1.0 Second generation biofuels

Second-generation biofuel production processes can use a variety of

non food crops. These include waste biomass, the stalks of wheat,

corn, wood, and special-energy-or-biomass crops (e.g. Miscanthus).

Second generation biofuels use biomass to liquid technology,

including cellulosic biofuels from non food crops. Many second

generation biofuels are under development such as biohydrogen,

biomethanol, DMF, Bio-DME, Fischer-Tropsch diesel, biohydrogen

diesel, mixed alcohols and wood diesel.

Cellulosic ethanol production uses non food crops or inedible waste

products and does not divert food away from the animal or human

food chain. Lignocellulose is the "woody" structural material of plants.

This feedstock is abundant and diverse, and in some cases (like

citrus peels or sawdust) it is in itself a significant disposal problem.

Producing ethanol from cellulose is a difficult technical problem to

solve. In nature, ruminant livestock (like cattle) eat grass and then

use slow enzymatic digestive processes to break it into glucose

(sugar). In cellulosic ethanol laboratories, various experimental

processes are being developed to do the same thing, and then the

sugars released can be fermented to make ethanol fuel. In 2009

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 32

scientists reported developing, using "synthetic biology", "15 new

highly stable fungal enzyme catalysts that efficiently break down

cellulose into sugars at high temperatures", adding to the 10

previously known. In addition, research conducted at TU Delft by

Jack Pronk has shown that elephant yeast, when slightly modified

can also create ethanol from non-edible ground sources (e.g. straw).

The recent discovery of the fungus Gliocladium roseum, points

toward the production of so-called myco-diesel from cellulose. This

organism was recently discovered in the rainforests of northern

Patagonia and has the unique capability of converting cellulose into

medium length hydrocarbons typically found in diesel fuel.

Scientists also work on experimental recombinant DNA genetic

engineering organisms that could increase biofuel potential.

Scientists working in New Zealand have developed a technology to

use industrial waste gases from steel mills as a feedstock for a

microbial fermentation process to produce ethanol.

4.2.0 Third generation biofuels

Algae fuel

Algae fuel, also called oilgae or third generation biofuel, is a biofuel

from algae. Algae are low-input, high-yield feedstocks to produce

biofuels. Based on laboratory experiments, it claimed that Algae can

produces up to 30 times more energy per acre than land crops such

as soybeans, but these yields have yet to be produced commercially.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 33

With the higher prices of fossil fuels (petroleum), there is much

interest in algaculture (farming algae). One advantage of many

biofuels over most other fuel types is that they are biodegradable,

and so relatively harmless to the environment if spilled. Algae fuel still

has its difficulties though, for instance to produce algae fuels it must

be mixed uniformly, which, if done by agitation, could affect biomass

growth.

Algae, such as Botryococcus braunii and Chlorella vulgaris, are

relatively easy to grow, but the algal oil is hard to extract. There are

several approaches, some of which work better than others.

Macroalgae (seaweed) also have a great potential for bioethanol and

biogas production.

Ethanol from living algae

Most biofuel production comes from harvesting organic matter and

then converting it to fuel but an alternative approach relies on the fact

that some algae naturally produce ethanol and this can be collected

without killing the algae. The ethanol evaporates and then can be

condensed and collected. The company Algenol is trying to

commercialize this process.

Helioculture

Helioculture is a newly developed Technology which is claimed to be

able to produce 20,000 gallons of fuel per acre per year, and which

removes carbon dioxide from the air as a feedstock for the fuel.

Helioculture involves direct conversion of carbon dioxide into fuel

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 34

using solar power. The process of Helioculture can develop many

different fuels and petroleum-derived chemicals all while not using

any fresh water or agriculture.

4.3.0 The Potential of Advanced Biofuels

Many uncertainties remain for the future of biofuels, including

competition from unconventional fossil fuel alternatives and concerns

about environmental tradeoffs. Perhaps the biggest uncertainty is the

extent to which the land intensity of current biofuel production can be

reduced. The amount of biofuel that can be produced from an acre of

land varies from 100 gallons per acre for EU rapeseed to 400 gallons

per acre for U.S. corn and 660 gallons per acre for Brazilian

sugarcane. Cellulosic ethanol could raise per acre ethanol yields to

more than 1,000 gallons, significantly reducing land requirements.

Cellulosic ethanol is made by breaking down the tough cellular

material that gives plants rigidity and structure and converting the

resulting sugar into ethanol. Cellulose is the world‘s most widely

available biological material, present in such low-value materials as

wood chips and wood waste, fastgrowing grasses, crop residues like

corn stover, and municipal waste.

U.S. cellulosic fuel production costs are now estimated at more than

$2.50 per gallon, compared with $1.65 per gallon for corn ethanol.

Venture capital and government subsidies are supporting companies

interested in making cellulosic ethanol commercially viable, primarily

in the United States, but also in several other countries, including

Canada, Brazil, China, Japan, and Spain.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 35

In the meantime, other costs of cellulosic ethanol production need to

be fully assessed, such as the impacts of harvesting grasses, trees,

and crop residues on the erodibility and fertility of land resources.

There are also questions regarding the upstream logistical and

environmental costs of harvesting, transporting, and storing large

volumes of bulky feedstock used in processing.

4.4.0 Future Role of Biofuels

Technological advances and efficiency, gains higher biomass yields

per acre and more gallons of biofuel per ton of biomass could steadily

reduce the economic cost and environmental impacts of biofuel

production. Biofuel production will likely be most profitable and

environmentally benign in tropical areas where growing seasons are

longer, per acre biofuel yields are

higher, and fuel and other input costs are lower. For example, Brazil

uses bagasse, which is a byproduct from sugar production, to power

ethanol distilleries, whereas the United States uses natural gas or

coal.

The future of global biofuels will depend on their profitability, which

depends on a number of interrelated factors. Key to this will be high

oil prices: 6years of steadily rising oil prices have provided economic

support for alternative fuels, unlike previous periods when oil prices

spiked and then fell rapidly, undercutting the profitability of nascent

alternative fuel programs. On the other hand, the sector‘s profitability

has been negatively affected by rising feedstock prices (corn and

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 36

vegetable oil, not sugar), which account for a very large share of

biofuel cost of production.

For this commodity-dependent industry, government support to

reduce profit uncertainty has been a common theme in the U.S.,

Brazil, and the EU, where biofuel production has been most

significant.

Biofuels will most likely be part of a portfolio of solutions to high oil

prices, including conservation and the use of other alternative fuels.

The role of biofuels in global fuel supplies is likely to remain modest

because of its land intensity. In the U.S., replacing all current gasoline

consumption with ethanol would require more land in corn production

than is presently in all agricultural production. Technology will be

central to boosting the role of biofuels. If the energy of widely

available, cellulose materials could be economically harnessed

around the world, biofuel yields per acre could more than double,

reducing land requirements significantly

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 37

CONCLUSION

Global interest in biofuels has grown strongly since the steep climb in

fossil fuel oil prices during 2004-06. Biofuels could provide countries

with a means to invest in their own rural areas instead of exporting

their capital to purchase fossil fuel. They would also contribute

significantly to mitigating global warming.

A massive new channel for investment in rural development through

the fuel economy could be highly strategic for alleviating poverty and

hunger in the developing world. However there are also risks. To be

competitive with fossil fuel energy sources, biofuels industries must

capture large economies of scale. They need a constant, reliable,

massive flow of plant material (feedstock) to keep processing facilities

running at high capacity so that the unit costs of production per liter of

biofuel are kept as low as possible.

This large-scale requirement could provide impetus for a

corresponding drive to large-scale farming, pushing the poor off their

land and excluding them from the biofuels revolution. It could also

lead to the replacement of food crop cultivation with biofuel crops on

large areas of land, driving up food prices for those who can least

afford it. The result would be more, not less poverty and hunger.

Today these countries are making critical decisions about their

biofuels industries that will determine such outcomes. ICRISAT is

working closely with governments and industry leaders to develop

technical, industrial and socio-economic models that ensure that the

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 38

rural poor capture a large proportion of the benefits, while retaining

strong economic competitiveness for industry. We call this the pro-

poor biofuels approach.

Through an ‗agri-science incubator‘ mechanism, ICRISAT has

partnered with several young biofuel companies and forward-looking

government agencies to test and adapt its pro-poor biofuel

technologies (crop varieties and cultivation methods) to the needs of

industry and government. This work is most advanced in India but

ICRISAT considers it equally urgent that it proceed in Africa, and

seeks investment support to extend the approach to that continent.

In India as in many other tropical countries, the leading biofuel

feedstock today is sugarcane molasses, which is processed to yield

bioethanol that can be blended into gasoline (petrol). Sugarcane

requires good land and large amounts of irrigation water, which are

difficult for the poor to obtain. The poorest rural dwellers in India and

Africa live in areas that are too dry for sugarcane cultivation.

So ICRISAT has improved a crop called sweet sorghum that is ideal

for drier areas and can produce a good yield with only moderate

levels of rainfall. Sweet sorghum is economically competitive with

sugarcane molasses, emits less pollution from processing, and yields

four times more net energy than maize grain.

Sweet sorghum yields grain as well as sugar. Rather than replacing

land grown to food, the cultivation of sweet sorghum for biofuel could

well stimulate increased yields of grain and stalk (excellent livestock

feed after the sugar is extracted). If implemented effectively, this

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 39

could re-invigorate a prime livelihood and food production option for

tens of millions of poor small-holder farmers across the drylands of

the developing world.

ICRISAT has formed an agri-business incubator partnership with

Rusni Distilleries in India to test and deploy sweet sorghum with

thousands of small-scale farmers. The arrangement supports these

farmers with technical inputs and advice, transport and processing of

the crop, and an assured price. Similar public-private consortia are

being developed in The Philippines and are at preliminary stages of

discussion in Africa.

Equally important as bioethanol, is biodiesel. Fossil-fuel diesel

accounts for 40% of India‘s oil imports. Across the developing world,

diesel trucks, pump engines, tractors, generators and many other

diesel-fueled devices are major consumers of energy and major

polluters. ICRISAT is improving two promising biodiesel crops:

Jatropha (a shrub/small tree) and Pongamia (a mid-sized tree).

These species can be grown across vast, underutilized, relatively

low-quality rainfed lands in both India and Africa (often referred to as

wastelands). Their seeds yield about 30% oil that can be used

directly to power village diesel engines, or trans-esterified in

processing facilities to be suitable for blending with fossil fuel diesel

for wide consumer use.

ICRISAT‘s biodiesel approach is to form public-private partnerships

geared towards the landless poor such as tribal groups and

impoverished villages. By working with governments and processors,

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 40

arrangements are made to give these poor people, especially women

access to wastelands for planting these biodiesel species. Once the

trees have matured the women collect the seeds and press out the oil

at the village level or sell them to large-scale processors to earn

desperately-needed hard cash.

There are very important investment opportunities today to accelerate

and ensure the success and wide impact of this pro-poor biofuels

approach, especially in Africa where it has only taken a toehold so

far. Research is especially needed on biodiesel crops, which have

never been bred – very high responses to breeding investments are

considered likely.

Investments to develop hybrid sweet sorghum could also have huge

impacts by raising productivity substantially, especially in Africa which

has missed the hybrid seed revolution that has transformed

agriculture for many crops in the rest of the world. Breeding sweet

sorghum for higher energy yield and for suitability for emerging

cellulosic bioethanol technology also holds great potential.

Socio-economic and impact assessment studies are needed to guide

the pro-poor approach to ensure that the poor are benefiting and that

the gains are sustainable, achieving a better understanding of

economic efficiency, land tenure, equity and other crucial issues to be

able to advise policymakers on ways to encourage pro-poor biofuel

systems.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 41

REFERENCES

Sanders, J. H., Shapiro, B.I. and Ramaswamy, S. 1996.

The Economics of Agricultural Technology Development in Semiarid Sub-Saharan Africa. John Hopkins University Press.

ICRISAT 2006.

Biofuel crops: Power to the poor. What ICRISAT Thinks, September 2006. Patancheru, Andhra Pradesh, India: International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT).

Badger PC.2002.

Ethanol from Cellulose: A general Review. Pages 17-20 in Trends in new crops and new uses (Janick J. Ed.). ASHS Press, Alexandria, VA. USA.

Blok K., de Jager D., Hendriks C., 2001. Economic Evaluation of Sectoral Emission Reduction Objectives for Climate Change.ECOFYS Energy and Environment.

Gübitz, G.M., Mittelbach, M. and M.Trabi (eds.) 1997.

Biofuels and Industrial Products from Jatropha curcas. Proceedings from the symposium Jatropha 97, Managua, Nicaragua. Published by Dbv-Verlag, The Technical University of Graz.

Commission of the European Communities, 2001. Communication from the Commission on alternative fuels for road transportation and on a set of measures to promote the use of biofuels, COM (2001) 547.

upport schemes under the common agricultural policy and support schemes for producers of certain crops. COM (2003) 23 final.

Wani SP, Osman M, Emmanuel D‘Silva and Sreedevi TK. 2006. Improved Livelihoods and Environmental Protection through Biodiesel

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 42

Plantations in Asia. Asian Biotechnology and Development Review. Vol. 8. No. 2, pp.11−29. Commission of the European Communities, 2004. Structures of the Taxation systems in the European Union—Data 1995–2002. 2004 Edition. Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union. Convery, F.J., Redmond, L., 2004. Allocating allowances in transfrontier emissions trading—a note on the European Union emissions trading scheme (EUETS). In: Spanish Portuguese Association of Environmental and Natural Resource Economists (AERNA), Vigo, Spain, 18–19 June 2004. Council of the European Union, 2003. Restructuring the community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity. Official Journal of the European Union, Council Directive 2003/ 96/2003. Den Uil, H., Baker, R.R., Deurwaarder, E.P., Elbersen, H.W., Weissmann, M., 2003. Conventional biotransportation fuels. NOVEM Report-2AVE-03.10. Department of Transport (UK), 2003. International resource costs of biodiesel and bioethanol. AEA Technology. Edwards, R., Griesemann, J.-C., Larive´ , J.-F., Mahieu, V., 2004. Wellto-wheels analysis of future automotive fuels and powertrains in the European context. EUCAR-JRC-CONCAWE Report.

ARTICLE IN PRESS 23 Personal communication DG TREN 11/2004. L. Ryan et al. / Energy Policy 34 (2006) 3184–3194 3193 European Environment Agency, 2004. Annual European Community greenhouse gas inventory 1990–2002 and inventory report 2004. Submission to the UNFCCC Secretariat. EEA Technical Report 2/2004.

The benefit and harm associated with bio-fuels Page 43

European Parliament and Council, 2003. On the Promotion of the Use of Biofuels or other Renewable Fuels for Transport (Directive 2003/30/EC). Fulton, L., Howes, T., Hardy, J., 2004. Biofuels for Transport: An International Perspective. International Energy Agency, Paris.