Updated:Looking into the EROEI of Ethanol
Who do we trust?
After doing some in-depth research, I was able to find several results concerning the EROEI(Energy Returned On Energy Invested) of ethanol. I could not find two sources which agreed with each other, thus who can we trust?
Looking more in-depth into Dr. Pimentel’s response, he is very detailed, maybe even too detailed. He includes in his results the “calories burned by the people doing the farm work. He not only calculates the energy needed to heat the water to ferment the grain, but also the energy needed to build the plant and all its parts – steel girders, concrete, and stainless steel.” Pimentel, when applying this equation to other energy sources, surprisingly considers gasoline to be a net energy loser “If you include the pumping and processing and so forth, it runs a little over 10 percent.” Skeptics of his results say he is not to include the energy cost of making the machinery, neither include the energy cost for feeding the people that work the machinery.
http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/2005/03/21_steilm_ethanolenergy/
Here are other sources which prove otherwise:
-The United States Department of Agriculture in 2004 published a report entitled “The 2001 Net Energy Balance of Corn-Ethanol.” They calculated the EROEI of ethanol by an energy output/input ratio of 1.67 to 1.
-Michael Wang, Hosein Shapouri, and James Diffield published a report in 2002 entitled “The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: an Update.” They calculated the EROEI of ethanol by an energy output/input ratio of 1.34 to 1.
-Hosein Shapouri, James Duffield and Michael Graboski published a report entitled “Estimating the Net Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol” in 1995. They calculated the EROEI of ethanol by an energy output/input ratio of 1.24 to 1.
-In the article “How Food and Fuel Compete for Land” in the Globalist, it is said corn-based ethanol yields 1.5 units of energy for each energy unit used.
UPDATED***(Thanks to Jack)
-In Dr. Christoph Berg, F.O. Licht presentation entitled "World Fuel Ethanol" presented to METI he calculated an EROEI of sugarcane ethanol at an 8 to 1 ratio. (Slide 20)
- A 2004 report entitled "Biofuels for Transport" by the International Energy Agnecy stated the EROEI off sugarcane ethanol in Brazil (2002) was 8.3 to 1 (Page 60)
- A recent 2006 report entitled "Biofuels for Transportation" provides a list of the EROEI of five different ethanol fuel types. Graph can be seen below (Page 17)
Ethanol Type
EROEI
Cellulosic Ethanol
Range from 2-36 to 1
Ethanol Sugar Cane
8 to 1
Ethanol Wheat
2 to 1
Ethanol Sugar Beets
2 to 1
Ethanol (Corn)
1.5 to 1
|
PROCESS |
EROI | |
|
Nonrenewable | ||
|
Oil and gas (domestic wellhead) |
|
|
|
|
|
Discoveries > 100.0 |
|
|
Production 23.0, discoveries 8.0 | |
|
Coal (mine mouth) |
| |
|
|
80.0 | |
|
|
30.0 | |
|
Oil shale |
0.7 to 13.3 | |
|
Coal liquefaction |
0.5 to 8.2 | |
|
Geopressured gas |
1.0 to 5.0 | |
|
Renewable | ||
|
Ethanol (sugercane) |
|
0.8 to 1.7 |
|
Ethanol (corn) |
|
1.3 |
|
Ethanol (corn residues) |
|
0.7 to 1.8 |
|
Methanol (wood) |
|
2.6 |
|
Solar space heat (fossil backup) |
|
|
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
Electricity Production | ||
|
Coal |
|
|
|
|
|
9.0 (27.0) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.0 (18.0) |
|
|
|
2.5 (7.5) |
|
Hydropower |
|
11.2 (33.6) |
|
Nuclear (light-water reactor) |
|
4.0 (12.0) |
|
Solar |
|
|
|
|
|
2.0 (6.0) |
|
|
|
4.2 (12.6) |
|
|
|
1.7 (5.1) to 10.0 (30.0) |
|
Geothermal |
|
|
|
|
|
4.0 (12.0) |
|
|
|
1.9 (5.7) to 13.0 (39.0) |
(EROEI of oil has severely diminished over time, once having a ratio of 100:1, now having an energy output/input ratio of 3:1)
Ultimately it is difficult to compare the results of these sources as their parameters all differ
Note* I will continue to update with more sources, feel free to update me


Here are five studies that all cite figures of positive 8-10 EROEI for ethanol from sugar cane. I have given page references for three of them and will find and post the others later.
1) FO Licht presentation to METI,
http://www.meti.go.jp/report/downloadfiles/g30819b40j.pdf
EROEI Calcs: Page 20
2) IEA Automotive Fuels for the Future
http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/1990/autofuel99.pdf
3) IEA: Biofuels for Transport
http://www.iea.org/textbase/nppdf/free/2004/biofuels2004.pdf
EROEI calcs: page 60
4) Worldwatch Institute & Government of Germany: Biofuels for Transport (Link to register – study is free)
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/4078
EROEI Calcs (for 12 fuel types): Page 17
5) Potential for Biofuels for Transport in Developing Countries
http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/IW3P/IB/2006/01/05/000090341_20060105161036/Rendered/PDF/ESM3120PAPER0Biofuels.pdf
Reply to this
First of all, note that the first three links "which prove otherwise", are all various combinations of the same authors - Wang and Shapouri. Interesting that their esimates jump all over the place, don't you think. By the way, the "2001" report was published in 2004. They went from an energy balance of 1.34 in 2002 to 1.67 in 2004. Do you know how they did that? A mere accounting trick. They merely allocated more of the energy inputs to the by-products, artificially lowering the energy inputs allocated to ethanol. That inflated the energy return.
If you want to see some other unsavory tactics of the ethanol lobby, see:
Caught in a Lie
Cheers,
Robert Rapier
Reply to this