Is ethanol a green fuel or just greenwash? The current U.S. biofuels program that promotes corn-based ethanol is far from environmental sustainability and should be dramatically revamped, concludes a new policy paper by the Baker Institute Energy Forum.
Current policy is likely to lead to dramatic increases in the “dead zone” that damages ecosystems and fisheries along the Mississippi River and make water shortages in some areas, driving significant increases in fuel crop irrigation more likely. Moreover, with little scientific evidence that ethanol contributes positively to greenhouse gas balances, it is hard to see how our biofuels policy could be labeled green at all. When land-use changes are taken into account, some researchers contend adding ethanol to the U.S. fuel system adds to GHG emissions more than traditional gasoline.
The costly policy is also offering little in the way of enhanced energy security, study authors found. In 2008, the U.S. government spent $4 billion in biofuels subsidies to replace only roughly 2 percent of the U.S. gasoline supply, meaning the average cost to the taxpayer of those “substituted” barrels of gasoline was roughly $82/barrel, or $1.95/gallon on top of what we pay at the pump.
Meeting the ambitious mandates from the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 — 36 billion gallons/year by 2022, up from 9 billion gallons in 2008 — also runs into logistical and commercial barriers. Ethanol is not transported in economical pipelines, flex-fuel vehicles and stations that carry fuel with high concentrations of ethanol are rare, and no commercial cellulosic ethanol is currently available even though 16 billion gallons are mandated by 2012.
So what to do? The study suggests that U.S. lawmakers need to make the mandate more achievable, and warns against renewing the tax credit for corn-based ethanol that runs out at the end of the year. Instead, the study recommends Congress eliminate the tariff on cheaper imported ethanol, often derived from sugarcane. Study authors also urge Congress to avoid defining corn-based ethanol as a “low-carbon fuel,” a move that would be based only on political expediency and not on scientific analysis. On other environmental issues, a variety of steps can be taken including discouraging planting on tile-drained land and even researching the viability of mandating no-till planting — but it still would not be wise to consider corn-based ethanol a green fuel.
James Coan is a research associate at the Baker Institute Energy Forum.