The emerging feedstock jatropha, a non-edible oil, has several positive characteristics, including 30 percent to 35 percent oil content, the ability to thrive in most soil types, drought resistance, properties that improve soil fertility and minimum management requirements. On the other hand, it hasn’t been commercially grown in the past. “We really don’t know what the economics and the yields are going to look like,” Bowen says.

Algae is another possible next-generation biodiesel feedstock. Since the 1940s, commercial-scale algae production has been studied in the areas of food production, wastewater treatment, nutraceuticals and greenhouse gas reduction, as well as fuel, Bowen says. Though there is a lot of excitement surrounding algae, there are still production difficulties.

Impact of Government Policies
In one of the energy sessions, Jacob Golbitz talked about the impact of governmental policies. He also touched on a newly released report called “Biofuels 2006: Production, Supply and Reality,” a HighQuest and Soyatech study of which he is the author.
While supply and demand are the major market forces affecting biodiesel production, governmental policies are a third player, Golbitz tells Biodiesel Magazine. Those policies may not be completely determinative of biofuels success or failure, but it’s certainly of critical importance.

In the report, Golbitz projects that biofuels production will grow to more than 16 billion gallons per year by 2015, with biodiesel making up 2.15 billion gallons of the total. In all, biodiesel capacity will displace about 4 percent of the estimated diesel consumption.

A total of 62 percent of the proven reserves of light sweet crude oil, the most easily extracted and refined oil, is located in the Middle East. If Golbitz’s biofuels projections are correct, biofuels production won’t make an impact on the need to import oil from those locations.

With that in mind, biofuels production won’t be able to make the United States close to the oft-repeated phrase “energy independent.” In his report, Golbitz makes the argument that the U.S. government is pursuing biofuels production despite the fact that it knows it won’t significantly impact needed energy inputs. “In absence of any kind of attractive foreign policy, we will pursue whatever domestic policy we can, regardless of how little it’s actually going to help,” he says. “In other words, to do something is better than doing nothing.” It’s a claim Golbitz can’t quantify or prove. “I expect to be challenged on it,” he says.

Another interesting facet of the study is the impact of government subsidies on biofuels production. With subsidies, the break-even point for biofuels production is significantly higher. “It creates an artificial possible price on soy oil or vegetable oil prices in general,” Golbitz says.

Still, though many view the subsidies as a waste of taxpayer money, it’s not an unprecedented level of governmental support. Using Golbitz’s projections on ethanol production, over a 10-year period, a 51-cent-per-gallon subsidy could cost taxpayers $71 billion.

That’s in line with other government-supported “patriotic” projects, Golbitz says. The Apollo Mission cost the equivalent of $122 billion in 2006 dollars. The interstate highway system, which was billed as a defense project, racked up $135 billion.
Golbitz feels the impact of biofuels will be limited without advances in cellulose-to-ethanol technologies. To reduce dependence on Middle Eastern oil, it will require technologies for non-food based fuels.

For more information on Soyatech, visit www.soyatech.com.

Holly Jessen is a Biodiesel Magazine staff writer. Reach her at hjessen@bbibiofuels.com or (701) 746-8385.

<-- Previous Page	1   2
View Entire Article