Bio-electricity Cleaner, More Efficient than Cellulosic Ethanol

Green Car Congress reports on a study that finds Bio-electricity is a better option than the combustion of Liquid Biofuels for Transportation, in terms of efficiency and GHG Emissions. The study is a life cycle assessment comparing the performance of bio-electricity and ethanol from a variety of pathways with respect to transportation kilometers and GHG offsets achieved per unit.


The study focused only on two criteria, i.e., kilometers traveled and greenhouse gas offsets. It omitted an examination of electricity and ethanol “for other policy-relevant criteria such as water consumption, air pollution or economic costs.”

Nevertheless, given current federal biofuel policy, it is critical to note that cellulosic ethanol, which does much better than corn ethanol in such assessments, means more emissions and fewer miles traveled than when you employ electric drive powered by electricity generated from biomass. Notes Elliott Campbell, lead author of a paper published in the 8 May issue of the journal Science, “We found that converting biomass to electricity rather than ethanol makes the most sense for two policy-relevant issues, transportation and climate.”

The results of the study correspond to prior studies commissioned by the Dutch government repeatedly supporting the conclusion that the conversion of biomass to electric power is more efficient, cost-effective and environmentally sound option compared with conversion to liquid fuels. Nevertheless, federal energy and agricultural policy so far continues to support ethanol.


The study by University of California, Merced, Assistant Professor Elliott Campbell along with Christopher Field of the Carnegie Institution’s Department of Global Ecology and David Lobell of Stanford University, found that bioelectricity produces an average 81% more transportation kilometers and 108% more emissions offsets per unit area cropland than cellulosic ethanol. Dutch researchers have obtained similar results. But, then, that’s science, rather than the prevailing pork politics.

In the assessment, the team used The Energy and Resources Group Biofuel Analysis Meta-Model (EBAMM) to consider scenarios covering a range of feedstocks and energy conversion technologies including corn and cellulosic ethanol, and four different vehicle classes: small- and mid-size cars and small and full-size SUVs. Co-product credits in EBAMM favor the ethanol pathway by accounting for ethanol co-products but not potential bioelectricity coproducts including steam for heat and fly-ash for cement, noted the researchers in their paper.

Continue reading here: Enviro Fit Retrofit Kit

Was this article helpful?

0 0