Literature DB >> 22390573

Replacing gasoline with corn ethanol results in significant environmental problem-shifting.

Yi Yang1, Junghan Bae, Junbeum Kim, Sangwon Suh.   

Abstract

Previous studies on the life-cycle environmental impacts of corn ethanol and gasoline focused almost exclusively on energy balance and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and largely overlooked the influence of regional differences in agricultural practices. This study compares the environmental impact of gasoline and E85 taking into consideration 12 different environmental impacts and regional differences among 19 corn-growing states. Results show that E85 does not outperform gasoline when a wide spectrum of impacts is considered. If the impacts are aggregated using weights developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), overall, E85 generates approximately 6% to 108% (23% on average) greater impact compared with gasoline, depending on where corn is produced, primarily because corn production induces significant eutrophication impacts and requires intensive irrigation. If GHG emissions from the indirect land use changes are considered, the differences increase to between 16% and 118% (33% on average). Our study indicates that replacing gasoline with corn ethanol may only result in shifting the net environmental impacts primarily toward increased eutrophication and greater water scarcity. These results suggest that the environmental criteria used in the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) be re-evaluated to include additional categories of environmental impact beyond GHG emissions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22390573     DOI: 10.1021/es203641p

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Environ Sci Technol        ISSN: 0013-936X            Impact factor:   9.028


  6 in total

Review 1.  A Review of Environmental Life Cycle Assessments of Liquid Transportation Biofuels in the Pan American Region.

Authors:  David R Shonnard; Bethany Klemetsrud; Julio Sacramento-Rivero; Freddy Navarro-Pineda; Jorge Hilbert; Robert Handler; Nydia Suppen; Richard P Donovan
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Exploring the relevance of spatial scale to life cycle inventory results using environmentally-extended input-output models of the United States.

Authors:  Yi Yang; Wesley W Ingwersen; David E Meyer
Journal:  Environ Model Softw       Date:  2018-01-01       Impact factor: 5.288

Review 3.  Environmental sustainability of biofuels: a review.

Authors:  Harish K Jeswani; Andrew Chilvers; Adisa Azapagic
Journal:  Proc Math Phys Eng Sci       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 2.704

4.  Environmental outcomes of the US Renewable Fuel Standard.

Authors:  Tyler J Lark; Nathan P Hendricks; Aaron Smith; Nicholas Pates; Seth A Spawn-Lee; Matthew Bougie; Eric G Booth; Christopher J Kucharik; Holly K Gibbs
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Land-use change and greenhouse gas emissions from corn and cellulosic ethanol.

Authors:  Jennifer B Dunn; Steffen Mueller; Ho-Young Kwon; Michael Q Wang
Journal:  Biotechnol Biofuels       Date:  2013-04-10       Impact factor: 6.040

6.  Production of Caproic Acid from Mixed Organic Waste: An Environmental Life Cycle Perspective.

Authors:  Wei-Shan Chen; David P B T B Strik; Cees J N Buisman; Carolien Kroeze
Journal:  Environ Sci Technol       Date:  2017-05-26       Impact factor: 9.028

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.