Cellulosic ethanol: A fuel for the future?

(continued from previous page)

And just like Georgia, other states are encouraging development of cellulosic ethanol.

The state of Michigan is working with Mascoma, a cellulosic ethanol company spun off from Dartmouth College, and said in July that they intend to build a plant in Michigan using wood wastes as feedstock.

Mascoma, also backed by high-profile venture capital firms, has designed organisms that speed up the process of breaking down biomass and converting sugars to ethanol.

Michigan's governor, Jennifer Granholm, is enthusiastic about the plan and says it will help the state economically. The total investment from the state and Mascoma could top $150 million, said Michael Shore, a spokesman from the Michigan Economic Development Corporation, a state agency.

"The state of Michigan will be putting some significant dollars on the line. We certainly believe there's a race to be first and we want to be in it," Shore said.

According to local press reports, the total investment of the Soperton, Ga., plant will be $225 million. A Range Fuels representative said that the company and Treutlen County have not finalized all of the incentives, which are said to include free use of land and tax abatements.

Federal mandates are setting a rapid pace in biofuel production and investment. Ethanol, made from corn, is now used as a gasoline addition, and blends with a high concentration of ethanol can power "flex-fuel" cars that run both ethanol and gas.

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 set a target of 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuels by 2012--a benchmark that is expected to be surpassed as early as next year. The current capacity from U.S. production is more than 6.5 billion gallons, with another 6.4 billion gallons currently under construction, according to the Renewable Fuels Association.

Biofuels today make up a fraction of gasoline consumption, which in the U.S. is about 400 million gallons a day, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

By mid-century, domestically grown biofuels could meet one third of current fuel demand, according to a 2005 report from the Departments of Energy and Agriculture. The report assumes a major portion will be derived from forests as well as agricultural waste products.

Deforestation?
As the investments continue to flow toward ethanol and government biofuel production targets rise, environmentalists are taking a closer look.

Making ethanol from the cellulose in agricultural and forestry waste rather than corn produces less greenhouse gases, according to environmental groups. An NRDC study found that, on average, corn-based ethanol reduces greenhouse gas pollution by 18 percent for every gallon of gasoline displaced.

Making ethanol from other sources of biomass can reduce the greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent to 75 percent depending on the feedstock, the group found. The analysis sought to analyze the emissions through the lifecycle of fuel production. Compared with perennial crops like grasses or managed forests, creating corn ethanol is more polluting because farmers use petroleum-based fertilizer and tractors that consume gas, according to studies.

The NRDC advocates incentives that favor "low-carbon biofuels," an approach that California is taking. Rather than setting biofuels production targets, federal mandates should draw distinctions between different types of biomasses used for fuels, said the NRDC's Greene. Policies should promote fuels that create the least amount of greenhouse gases measured during production, refining and burning of fuels, Greene said.

From the environmental point of view, the Range Fuels plant is notable because it's moving fuel production into the forests and away from competing uses from agricultural land, Greene added.

However, he notes that forests are already under a lot of strain from sprawl and the pulp and paper industries. "Going to the forests is certainly no panacea," he said.

A citizen advocacy group called Food and Water Watch last month published a report last month that criticized the land-grab mentality now hovering around ethanol. It warned that the environmental effects of large-scale cellulosic ethanol production are still not well-understood.

"Even cellulosic ethanol, a considerably better alternative than corn ethanol, is limited by the impacts that large-scale production of feedstocks and fuel would have on the environment," it concluded.

Georgia's Dartnell argues that building a fuel industry around the forests is actually good for trees. He notes that the land being used in the Range Fuels plant is a plantation, where trees are planted in rows for miles, and was converted from cotton and tobacco farms over the past century.

Deforestation should not be a concern, he says, because the state has an inventory process and, at this point, the state is growing trees faster than they consume them. Creating a demand for tree residue will mean that landowners have an interest in managing the resource sustainably, he said.

"In the Forest Commission, our mission statement doesn't say anything about making ethanol," Dartnell said. "It's all about clean air and healthy forests. Part of that is the economic viability of owning forest land."

Previous page
Page 1 | 2
More from News.com on this story's topics

Biofuel

RSS feed

Environment and Energy

Create an email alert | RSS feed

See more CNET content tagged:
fuel, Georgia, branch, waste, gas

75 comments (Page 1 of 3)
Nice to see
by billmosby August 14, 2007 4:40 AM PDT
Nice to see that some of the questions about ethanol are aired in this article, instead of the indiscriminate cheerleading that one often sees in articles about it.
Reply to this comment
Agreed.
by Wiz Zee August 14, 2007 6:17 AM PDT
Using farmland to run automobiles is really one of the most misguided ideas that I've ever seen. I have no problem with using by products, I would have serious doubts that such a method ever make much of a dent in gasoline usage. The only real long term solution is scrapping the internal combustion engine. Fire is pretty much the most primitive technology known to man. There has to be something better. It's really nuts that we are starting tiny little contained fires in order to propel ourselves around.
Reply to this comment View reply
Cellulosic Ethanol
by sirgak August 14, 2007 8:11 AM PDT
I ,ike the idea of putting the waste material to use. But, is there a net energy surplus, or net loss, meaning, does it consume more energy to make the ethanol, than you get from the ethanol produced? I think the better energy fuel of the future is in the hydrogen fuel cell technology, where the hydrogen is infinitely recyclable.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
Hemp is cellulose. Use it!
by dahnb August 14, 2007 8:31 AM PDT
Hemp (weed) is used world wide. It would make an excellent source of cellulose needing little water, fertilization, or pest control.
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
OK
by monte_meade August 14, 2007 8:35 AM PDT
But, hasn't nature already done most of the job with coal? Not sexy enough. Change for change sake. Pull a horse trailer with a tractor. But, don't clear the forest floors for fire control. Liberal thinking is a non-sequitor. While I'm here, Chrysler's ill fated romance with the mini-turbine needs a new look.
Reply to this comment View reply
We told you so! Milk soon to be $5 a gallon, Now a 2x4 will be $5
by Manhattan2 August 14, 2007 8:37 AM PDT
Simply look at the efficiency that photosynthesis can capture the energy from the sun and you will see that biofuels and ethanol are a dead end path. Direct Solar energy capture by high-grade solar cells with parabolic increased suns is the only solution to replace gas and oil. Sure the price may always be more expensive than oil but look at the big picture in Iraq and yes maybe global warming if CO2 has an effect on warming and you will see that we need a solution well before oil runs out. A Solar Transfer just may be the solution. Burning food and the very things like the trees in this story that recycle CO2 out of the air and give us Oxygen is suicide. How could the government have passed the ethanol programs? Milk, eggs, meat, everything is going up in cost and the thing about it is that it takes more energy to plant, fertilize, harvest, and distill this mobile energy source than the amount of energy you can get out of the process. Do the research! Please post any numbers that you find especially the per meter efficiency of a corn plant or other crops to capture the suns energy. A solar transfer from the highest solar constant zones will prove to be the answer. We promise! and We told you so!
Reply to this comment View all 2 replies
Fuel for the near future
by TomboSlicko August 14, 2007 9:31 AM PDT
Ethanol will be just one of many solutions for the near future. All the arguments here are always about the perfect fuel .. yada .. yada.. lets start getting off of oil with many different technologies and stop being critical of each one saying its not perfect. Let the farmers make a few bucks for a while and cellulosic will also help out for a longer term solution. Ethanol is not a replacement just a supplement.
Reply to this comment View reply
The latest solution
by Clouseau2 August 14, 2007 10:28 AM PDT
10 years ago it was "thermal depolymerization" ... Lets see how long cellulosic ethanol remains the panacea.
Reply to this comment
no single solution
by bridge solution August 14, 2007 10:47 AM PDT
creating a bridge to any kind of viable nergy poliy means geting rid of single solutions. solar, coal, wind...just words to replace "oil" in conversations that start "we all must". business efficiences can drive conservation, as soon as business efficiencies are made necessary, instead of "the way we have always done things" being the answer to every change. hydrogen has a place. as an example, coastal wind turbines could be aimed at electrolysis off peak, with fuel cell power being added back in on-peak. wood based ethanol, and methanol, take nothing from lumber. and the net is reducing th aste factor in pulp wppd prodiction. coal is a subsidy from the planet itself..as is oil. used intelligently, the supply can last quite a while. no single answer. no monloiths. all that sngls answer solutions have ever done for an economy is empower the few, and leave the rest complaining.
Reply to this comment
Butanol is better for fuel
by willdryden August 14, 2007 12:14 PM PDT
Drink the ethanol, burn the butanol. http://www.butanol.com/
Reply to this comment
1 | 2 | 3 | Next 10 Comments >>
Powered by Jive Software
advertisement
RSS Feeds
Add headlines from CNET News.com to your homepage or feedreader.
Google
Yahoo
MSN
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Today's Top Stories
EarthLink ditches Philly Wi-Fi network
Craigslist files lawsuit against eBay
A reminder of why Microsoft wanted Yahoo
Online ads showing signs of economic wear?
Facebook pulls 'stalker list' tool
Most Popular Stories
Welcome to the social mess?
HP in talks to buy EDS
HP to acquire EDS for $13.9 billion
Mac Office sales soar on Apple's gains
Photos: Top 10 reviews of the week
Markets

Market news, charts, SEC filings, and more

Related quotes

Dow Jones Industrials (-0.34%) -44.13 12,832.18
S&P 500 (-0.04%) -0.54 1,403.04
NASDAQ (0.27%) 6.63 2,495.12
CNET TECH (-0.06%) -0.99 1,744.82
  Symbol Lookup
Detroit auto show
Detroit auto show

Detroit auto show
advertisement
On TechRepublic: 10 ways users mess up their computers
Advanced
search
Advanced
search
Visit other CNET Networks sites: