IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/een/eenhrr/0931.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Economics of Ethanol Production, a Brief Introduction

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan R.Evers

    (PhD Student, Griffith University, Australia)

  • Tor Hundloe

    (Environmental Management, Griffith University, Australia)

  • Peter Daniels

    (Griffith University, Australia)

Abstract

This research has been carried out to establish; the importance of valuing externalities in relating decision making to the triple bottom line of ethanol production. By treating organic wastes as a resource and applying a different method of waste management, organic wastes could contribute significantly to global energy needs. The ethanol distillation process has a waste product - stillage; a soup like waste stream that contains substantial organic content. By digesting this material to optimum efficiency there are three resources recovered – biogas (80% methane), biosolids (high in nutrients equivalent to high grade fertiliser) and recyclable water. Current waste treatment in the ethanol production industry focuses on drying the stillage waste and using the resultant material as mulch to be spread over crops; energy intensive, has little benefit and increases the cost of production. Therefore if a waste treatment process could convert the waste into recoverable resources; such as methane; then the subsequent methane utilised back in the distillation / production process as a source of energy, this would essentially reduce the cost of producing ethanol in accordance with the true costs being considered – in other words making sure all externalities are valued. Unless an economic advantage can be established, the true benefit of valuing this type of waste treatment is redundant. This relates to the current way in which the economy works. Ultimately all decisions of business and industry relate to the bottom line, the profitability of a project, will the project make money. By putting a value on externalities associated with a project or process it can be shown whether a project will be profitable, even when considering the impact on the environment and society, not just the economy. Ultimately, when all externalities can be quantified and valued and shown to be positive - the project is inherently sustainable Values for the externalities can be derived from various references such as: current market value. Carbon now has a value per tonne of emissions established in several markets around the world – these values can be attributed directly to energy use. The value of water has been established through research and can also be attributed to water use. The total economic value (TEV) of water, can be broken down into three components: the direct use-value (used or potentially useable by humans); the ecological support value (value to the environment), and the option value (value to society from having the resource available at some time in the future to be used). Ecosystem support value is associated with the assumed contributions of the resource cycles in their naturally-occurring states, or in some similar state, to provide flows to the ecosphere of the area – such as carbon, water and nitrogen. To the degree that the water is removed from the area, as with the industrial uses, for instance, this value is lost. Use value is triggered explicitly by the removal of the water from the aquifer, and its delivery to a specified user, or its storage in a location where it is available for use, in some way, by humans. Therefore, this research aims to show that within ethanol distillation, by utilising waste treatment to recover resources, using those resources directly in the operation / process / production, valuing all externalities associated both foregone and utilised; the cost of production should decrease when scrutinised from an environmental economic perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan R.Evers & Tor Hundloe & Peter Daniels, 2009. "Economics of Ethanol Production, a Brief Introduction," Environmental Economics Research Hub Research Reports 0931, Environmental Economics Research Hub, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
  • Handle: RePEc:een:eenhrr:0931
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://crawford.anu.edu.au/research_units/eerh/pdf/EERH_RR31.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Baker, Allen & Zahniser, Steven, 2007. "Ethanol Reshapes the Corn Market," Amber Waves:The Economics of Food, Farming, Natural Resources, and Rural America, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, pages 1-6, May.
    2. World Commission on Environment and Development,, 1987. "Our Common Future," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780192820808.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. EERH Working Papers Statistics for February 2010
      by David Stern in Stochastic Trend on 2010-03-04 08:25:00

    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. Evers, Jonathan Rhys & Hundloe, Tor & Daniels, Peter L., 2009. "Environmental Economics of Ethanol Production – a brief introduction," Research Reports 94880, Australian National University, Environmental Economics Research Hub.
    2. CHEN, Helen S.Y., 2020. "Designing Sustainable Humanitarian Supply Chains," OSF Preprints m82ar, Center for Open Science.
    3. Denise Ravet, 2011. "Lean production: the link between supply chain and sustainable development in an international environment," Post-Print hal-00691666, HAL.
    4. Mara Del Baldo, 2012. "Corporate social responsibility and corporate governance in Italian SMEs: the experience of some “spirited businesses”," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 16(1), pages 1-36, February.
    5. Michael Howes & Liana Wortley & Ruth Potts & Aysin Dedekorkut-Howes & Silvia Serrao-Neumann & Julie Davidson & Timothy Smith & Patrick Nunn, 2017. "Environmental Sustainability: A Case of Policy Implementation Failure?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, January.
    6. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    7. Chin-Shan Lu & Kuo-Chung Shang & Chi-Chang Lin, 2016. "Examining sustainability performance at ports: port managers’ perspectives on developing sustainable supply chains," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(8), pages 909-927, November.
    8. Kebede, Yohannes, 1993. "The Limits to Common Resource Management: The Bypassed Commons or Commons without Tragedy," MPRA Paper 662, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 May 1993.
    9. John Stanley & Janet Stanley, 2023. "Improving Appraisal Methodology for Land Use Transport Measures to Reduce Risk of Social Exclusion," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-18, August.
    10. Nora Mzavanadze, 2009. "Building A Framework For National Sustainable Development Assessment And Application For Lithuania: Sustainability In Transition," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 11(01), pages 97-130.
    11. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    12. Isin Ceti̇n, 2017. "Accounting Requirements And Records On Bank Subscribed Capital Compliance With European Directives," Annals - Economy Series, Constantin Brancusi University, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1, pages 52-68, February.
    13. Jean-Michel Sahuta & Sandrine Boulerne & Medhi Mili & Frédéric Teulon, 2014. "What Relation Exists Between Corporate Social Responsibility (Csr) And Longevity Of Firms?," Working Papers 2014-248, Department of Research, Ipag Business School.
    14. Alba Rocio Gutierrez Garzon & Pete Bettinger & Jacek Siry & Bin Mei & Jesse Abrams, 2019. "The Terms Foresters and Planners in the United States Use to Infer Sustainability in Forest Management Plans: A Survey Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, December.
    15. Shehu Folaranmi Gbolahan Yusuf & Oluwabunmi Oluwaseun Popoola & Lindokhule Gwala & Thinandavha Nesengani, 2021. "Promoting University–Community Alliances in the Experiential Learning Activities of Agricultural Extension Postgraduate Students at the University of Fort Hare, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-18, September.
    16. Filipa Correia & Philipp Erfruth & Julie Bryhn, 2018. "The 2030 Agenda: The roadmap to GlobALLizaton," Working Papers 156, United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs.
    17. Choy Yee Keong, 2005. "Sustainable Development—An Institutional Enclave (with Special Reference to the Bakun Dam–Induced Development Strategy in Malaysia)," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(4), pages 951-971, December.
    18. Anthony Bennett, 1998. "Sustainable public/private partnerships for public service delivery," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 22(3), pages 193-199, August.
    19. Smith, Joyotee & Scherr, Sara J., 2003. "Capturing the Value of Forest Carbon for Local Livelihoods," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(12), pages 2143-2160, December.
    20. Buys, Piet & Chomitz, Ken & Dasgupta, Susmita & Deichmann, Uwe & Larsen, Bjorn & Meisner, Craig & Nygard, Jostein & Pandey, Kiran & Pinnoi, Nat & Wheeler, David, 2006. "The economics of decentralized poverty-environment programs: An application for Lao PDR," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 28(7), pages 811-824, October.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:een:eenhrr:0931. 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: CAP Web Team (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/asanuau.html .

    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.