IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v138y2016i3d10.1007_s10584-016-1764-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use

Author

Listed:
  • John M. DeCicco

    (University of Michigan Energy Institute)

  • Danielle Yuqiao Liu

    (University of Michigan Energy Institute)

  • Joonghyeok Heo

    (University of Michigan Energy Institute)

  • Rashmi Krishnan

    (University of Michigan Energy Institute)

  • Angelika Kurthen

    (University of Michigan Energy Institute)

  • Louise Wang

    (University of Michigan Energy Institute)

Abstract

The use of liquid biofuels has expanded over the past decade in response to policies such as the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) that promote their use for transportation. One rationale is the belief that biofuels are inherently carbon neutral, meaning that only production-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions need to be tallied when comparing them to fossil fuels. This assumption is embedded in the lifecycle analysis (LCA) modeling used to justify and administer such policies. LCA studies have often found that crop-based biofuels such as corn ethanol and biodiesel offer at least modest net GHG reductions relative to petroleum fuels. Data over the period of RFS expansion enable empirical assessment of net CO2 emission effects. This analysis evaluates the direct carbon exchanges (both emissions and uptake) between the atmosphere and the U.S. vehicle-fuel system (motor vehicles and the physical supply chain for motor fuels) over 2005–2013. While U.S. biofuel use rose from 0.37 to 1.34 EJ/yr over this period, additional carbon uptake on cropland was enough to offset only 37 % of the biofuel-related biogenic CO2 emissions. This result falsifies the assumption of a full offset made by LCA and other GHG accounting methods that assume biofuel carbon neutrality. Once estimates from the literature for process emissions and displacement effects including land-use change are considered, the conclusion is that U.S. biofuel use to date is associated with a net increase rather than a net decrease in CO2 emissions.

Suggested Citation

  • John M. DeCicco & Danielle Yuqiao Liu & Joonghyeok Heo & Rashmi Krishnan & Angelika Kurthen & Louise Wang, 2016. "Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 667-680, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:138:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-016-1764-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-016-1764-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-016-1764-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-016-1764-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sperling, Dan & Yeh, Sonia, 2009. "Low Carbon Fuel Standards," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt8834g64j, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    2. John M. DeCicco, 2015. "The liquid carbon challenge: evolving views on transportation fuels and climate," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 98-114, January.
    3. Mosnier, A. & Havlík, P. & Valin, H. & Baker, J. & Murray, B. & Feng, S. & Obersteiner, M. & McCarl, B.A. & Rose, S.K. & Schneider, U.A., 2013. "Alternative U.S. biofuel mandates and global GHG emissions: The role of land use change, crop management and yield growth," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 602-614.
    4. Searchinger, Timothy & Heimlich, Ralph & Houghton, R. A. & Dong, Fengxia & Elobeid, Amani & Fabiosa, Jacinto F. & Tokgoz, Simla & Hayes, Dermot J. & Yu, Hun-Hsiang, 2008. "Use of U.S. Croplands for Biofuels Increases Greenhouse Gases Through Emissions from Land-Use Change," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12881, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    5. John DeCicco, 2013. "Biofuel’s carbon balance: doubts, certainties and implications," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 121(4), pages 801-814, December.
    6. Richard Plevin & Mark Delucchi & Felix Creutzig, 2014. "Response to Comments on “Using Attributional Life Cycle Assessment to Estimate Climate-Change Mitigation …”," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(3), pages 468-470, May.
    7. Chen, Xiaoguang & Huang, Haixiao & Khanna, Madhu & Önal, Hayri, 2014. "Alternative transportation fuel standards: Welfare effects and climate benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 67(3), pages 241-257.
    8. John DeCicco, 2012. "Biofuels and carbon management," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 111(3), pages 627-640, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dias, Goretty M. & Ayer, Nathan W. & Kariyapperuma, Kumudinie & Thevathasan, Naresh & Gordon, Andrew & Sidders, Derek & Johannesson, Gudmundur H., 2017. "Life cycle assessment of thermal energy production from short-rotation willow biomass in Southern Ontario, Canada," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 204(C), pages 343-352.
    2. John M. DeCicco, 2017. "Author’s response to commentary on “Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use”," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 123-129, September.
    3. Ning Qin & Lingyun Li & Xiaozhen Wan & Xu Ji & Yu Chen & Chaokun Li & Ping Liu & Yijie Zhang & Weijie Yang & Junfeng Jiang & Jianye Xia & Shuobo Shi & Tianwei Tan & Jens Nielsen & Yun Chen & Zihe Liu, 2024. "Increased CO2 fixation enables high carbon-yield production of 3-hydroxypropionic acid in yeast," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Graham Palmer, 2018. "A Biophysical Perspective of IPCC Integrated Energy Modelling," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-17, April.
    5. Robert D. De Kleine & Timothy J. Wallington & James E. Anderson & Hyung Chul Kim, 2017. "Commentary on “carbon balance effects of US biofuel production and use,” by DeCicco et al. (2016)," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 111-119, September.
    6. Hoekman, S. Kent & Broch, Amber, 2018. "Environmental implications of higher ethanol production and use in the U.S.: A literature review. Part II – Biodiversity, land use change, GHG emissions, and sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 3159-3177.
    7. Anita Konieczna & Kamila Mazur & Adam Koniuszy & Andrzej Gawlik & Igor Sikorski, 2022. "Thermal Energy and Exhaust Emissions of a Gasifier Stove Feeding Pine and Hemp Pellets," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(24), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Khanna, Madhu & Wang, Weiwei & Wang, Michael, 2018. "Assessing the Carbon Neutrality of Biofuel: An Anticipated Baseline Approach," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274450, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    9. Elias Vieren & Toon Demeester & Wim Beyne & Chiara Magni & Hamed Abedini & Cordin Arpagaus & Stefan Bertsch & Alessia Arteconi & Michel De Paepe & Steven Lecompte, 2023. "The Potential of Vapor Compression Heat Pumps Supplying Process Heat between 100 and 200 °C in the Chemical Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-28, September.
    10. Chamkalani, A. & Zendehboudi, S. & Rezaei, N. & Hawboldt, K., 2020. "A critical review on life cycle analysis of algae biodiesel: current challenges and future prospects," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    11. Wigley, Tom M.L. & Hong, Sanghyun & Brook, Barry W., 2021. "Value-added diagnostics for the assessment and validation of integrated assessment models," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    12. Andres Annuk & Wahiba Yaïci & Matti Lehtonen & Risto Ilves & Toivo Kabanen & Peep Miidla, 2021. "Simulation of Energy Exchange between Single Prosumer Residential Building and Utility Grid," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-13, March.
    13. Pereira, L.G. & Cavalett, O. & Bonomi, A. & Zhang, Y. & Warner, E. & Chum, H.L., 2019. "Comparison of biofuel life-cycle GHG emissions assessment tools: The case studies of ethanol produced from sugarcane, corn, and wheat," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 1-12.
    14. T. Nelson Thompson, 2023. "The market for biofuels: sustainable prospects for international shipping and the advances of the Port of Rotterdam," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 25(1), pages 196-209, March.
    15. John M. DeCicco, 2018. "Methodological Issues Regarding Biofuels and Carbon Uptake," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    16. Ospina, G. & Selim, Mohamed Y.E. & Al Omari, Salah A.B. & Hassan Ali, Mohamed I. & Hussien, Adel M.M., 2019. "Engine roughness and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine fueled with three biofuels," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1465-1472.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Plevin, Richard J. & Delucchi, Mark A. & O’Hare, Michael, 2017. "Fuel carbon intensity standards may not mitigate climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 93-97.
    2. John M. DeCicco, 2017. "Author’s response to commentary on “Carbon balance effects of U.S. biofuel production and use”," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 123-129, September.
    3. Yeh, Sonia & Witcover, Julie & Lade, Gabriel E. & Sperling, Daniel, 2016. "A review of low carbon fuel policies: Principles, program status and future directions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 220-234.
    4. John M. DeCicco, 2015. "The liquid carbon challenge: evolving views on transportation fuels and climate," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(1), pages 98-114, January.
    5. Yeh, Sonia & Burtraw, Dallas & Sterner, Thomas & Greene, David, 2021. "Tradable performance standards in the transportation sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    6. Mohlin, Kristina & Camuzeaux, Jonathan R. & Muller, Adrian & Schneider, Marius & Wagner, Gernot, 2018. "Factoring in the forgotten role of renewables in CO2 emission trends using decomposition analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 290-296.
    7. Catherine L. Kling & Raymond W. Arritt & Gray Calhoun & David A. Keiser, 2016. "Research Needs and Challenges in the FEW System: Coupling Economic Models with Agronomic, Hydrologic, and Bioenergy Models for Sustainable Food, Energy, and Water Systems," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 16-wp563, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    8. Creutzig, Felix & McGlynn, Emily & Minx, Jan & Edenhofer, Ottmar, 2011. "Climate policies for road transport revisited (I): Evaluation of the current framework," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 2396-2406, May.
    9. John M. DeCicco, 2018. "Methodological Issues Regarding Biofuels and Carbon Uptake," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-15, May.
    10. Hoekman, S. Kent & Broch, Amber, 2018. "Environmental implications of higher ethanol production and use in the U.S.: A literature review. Part II – Biodiversity, land use change, GHG emissions, and sustainability," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 3159-3177.
    11. Lade, Gabriel E. & Lin Lawell, C.-Y. Cynthia, 2015. "The design and economics of low carbon fuel standards," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 91-99.
    12. Austin, K.G. & Jones, J.P.H. & Clark, C.M., 2022. "A review of domestic land use change attributable to U.S. biofuel policy," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    13. Xie, Lunyu & MacDonald, Sarah L. & Auffhammer, Maximilian & Jaiswal, Deepak & Berck, Peter, 2019. "Environment or food: Modeling future land use patterns of miscanthus for bioenergy using fine scale data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C), pages 225-236.
    14. Klotz, Richard & Bento, Antonio M. & Landry, Joel R., 2013. "Economic Insights Required for Using Lifecycle Analysis for Policy Decisions," 2014 Allied Social Sciences Association (ASSA) Annual Meeting, January 3-5, 2014, Philadelphia, PA 161654, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    15. Condon, Nicole & Klemick, Heather & Wolverton, Ann, 2015. "Impacts of ethanol policy on corn prices: A review and meta-analysis of recent evidence," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 63-73.
    16. Fulton, Lew & Morrison, Geoff & Parker, Nathan & Witcover, Julie & Sperling, Dan, 2014. "Three Routes Forward For Biofuels: Incremental, Transitional, and Leapfrog," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt3pp0g4fb, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    17. Chen, Xiaoguang & Khanna, Madhu, 2014. "Indirect Land Use Effects of Corn Ethanol in the U.S: Implications for the Conservation Reserve Program," 2014 Annual Meeting, July 27-29, 2014, Minneapolis, Minnesota 170284, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    18. Landry, Joel R. & Bento, Antonio M., 2020. "On the trade-offs of regulating multiple unpriced externalities with a single instrument: Evidence from biofuel policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    19. Derek Lemoine, 2017. "Escape from Third-Best: Rating Emissions for Intensity Standards," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(4), pages 789-821, August.
    20. Joseph Palazzo & Roland Geyer & Sangwon Suh, 2020. "A review of methods for characterizing the environmental consequences of actions in life cycle assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 24(4), pages 815-829, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:138:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-016-1764-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.