Jacobson and Chu offer different futures for biofuels

Biofuels are a complicated issue and seen to draw up conflict at the mere mention of their name. Figuring the economic, social, and environmental implications of developing a biofuel industry requires the use of complex computer models (much like those used in climate change scenarios) with numerous input variables that affect the outcome of the individual studies.

Two of the main players in the foreground of the debate have come up with very different views based upon their studies. One is Energy Secretary Steven Chu; the other is Stanford Professor Mark Jacobson.

Jacobson has stated that, "Biofuels are the most damaging choice we could make in our efforts to move away from using fossil fuels"; and Chu has stated that, "developing the next generation of biofuels is key to our effort to end our dependence on foreign oil and address the climate crisis, while creating millions of new jobs that can't be outsourced".

Why do these two celebrated scientists differ so greatly in their view of biofuels? Jacobson's research can be found here or here. Chu's research on biofuels can be found here, here, or here.

The difference of opinion may be that these two scientists are talking about different generations of biofuels. The first generation of biofuels relied on food crops for their feedstocks; this was primarily corn, soy, palm, and sugarcane crops. Then came along second generation biofuels, or cellulosic ethanol; the feedstocks for this kind of biofuel came primarily from switchgrass, miscanthus, and agricultural waste. Third generation biofuels rely on genetically modified plants that ultimately increase energy yield per acre or decrease the amount of energy needed to process the feedstocks into fuel. Fourth generation biofuels add an increased capacity to capture CO2 from the atmosphere to the equation; these plants are not only engineered to have high energy yields and low conversion costs, but they also are engineered to soak up more CO2 than regular plants. Read a starter article on the four generations of biofuels here. Read a more in depth article here.

Jacobson's report on biofuels ultimately recommended against ethanol made from corn and switchgrass; "cellulosic ethanol was worse than corn ethanol because it results in more airpollution, requires more land to produce, and causes more damage to wildlife." Corn and switchgrass ethanol finished last and second to last in his list of worst vehicle fuel options.

Additionally, Jacobson's report did not take into account the use of agricultural waste residues like sugarcane bagasse and corn stover, feedstocks that do not require water, fertilizer, or the use of farm machinery to harvest.

The Genomics: GTL research program "focuses on developing technologies to understand and use the diverse capabilities of plants and microbes for innovative solutions to DOE energy and environmental mission challenges". Here is their viewpoint on the benefits and challenges facing cellulosic ethanol.

Where are we in terms of production? We have commercialized first generation ethanol to the point where we have learned its limitations; second generation facilities are set to come online next year; third and fourth generation biofuels are still in the experimental stage. Many problems surface for biofuels going from the laboratory phase to commercial scale, but scientists continue to build off of their successes to evolve the industry toward sustainability.

Perhaps the difference between Jacobson and Chu is that while Jacobson is a realist, Chu is a dreamer. Our scientists have already unlocked so many technological advancements in the twentieth century.

Chu's vision is one that spans the entire twenty-first century and looks toward finding solutions to biofuels' limitations. Jacobson is correct in his assessment that current forms of biofuels are not much better than the fossil fuel systems that currently power our society. The difference of opinion in the general public comes from whose eyes you choose to look through and how much time you think we have to solve the developing energy and environmental crises.


Source:examiner