> home
> About
> Contact Us
> Editorial Info
> IEEE-USA

11.10

By Patrick E. Meyer, Ph.D.

Introduction

Biofuels account for 1 to 2 percent of global transportation fuel and, according to the World Bank (2008), their share is projected to continue rising to about 5 or 6 percent by 2020. The growth of biofuel production has already had serious consequences for water resources and biodiversity (Barney & DiTomaso, 2010; Fingerman et al., 2010). Despite the expectation that the transport sector is expected to steadily switch from fossil fuels to a larger fraction of biofuels, the link between water resources and increased biofuel consumption has not yet been analyzed in great detail (Lienden et al., 2010), nor has the link between biodiversity and land-use change due to biofuel crop production (Fletcher et al., 2010).

Preliminarily research shows that increased biofuel production could have considerable consequences on water consumption. For example, life-cycle water consumption for ethanol production in California is estimated to be up to 1000 times that of gasoline due to a cultivation phase that consumes over 99 percent of life-cycle water use for agricultural biofuels (Fingerman et al., 2010). The impact of biofuels on biodiversity is also extensive; it is argued that biofuel crops are best described as invasive species, which will compromise biodiversity of both plant and animal life (Barney & DiTomaso, 2010).

In this six-part series on biofuel and biomass energy, I discuss the most critical and controversial issues surrounding the biofuel industry. In previous parts, I have discussed biofuel basics, outlining the general premise of the biofuel industry (Meyer, 2009a); emissions impacts and infrastructure development (Meyer, 2009b); land availability, conversion, and deforestation (Meyer, 2010a); and the food versus fuel and profit versus hunger debates (Meyer, 2010b). This article, the fifth in the series, provides a discussion on the impact of biofuel development on water usage and biodiversity.

Biofuels and Water

Ensuring inexpensive and clean water is an overriding global challenge which will likely be intensified by the increasing demand for biofuels for transportation (Dominguez-Faus et al., 2009). This challenge exists for two primary reasons, namely that large quantities of water are needed to grow the biofuel crops and also because water pollution is exacerbated by agricultural drainage containing fertilizers, pesticides, and sediment (Dominguez-Faus et al., 2009).  With these challenges in mind, as the demand for ethanol, biodiesel, and food has increased globally, there has also developed competing pressures on land use strategies in most agricultural regions of the world (Lin & Brunsell, 2010).

The water requirements of biofuel production depend on the type of feedstock used and on geographic and climate variables, but estimates show that water requirements in the United States necessitate 500-4000 liters of water to grow enough feedstock to produce only 1 liter of ethanol (Dominguez-Faus et al., 2009). Figure 1 below shows water and land requirements to produce 1 liter of ethanol in the United States from a variety of feedstock crops.

Figure 1: Evapotranspiraton and irrigation in liters of water (Lw),
and land requirements in square meters (m2) to produce 1 liter of
ethanol (Le) in the US from different feedstock crops
Image source: Dominguez-Faus et al. (2009)

In terms of end-user impacts, assuming a conservative 800 liter water to ethanol ratio and 16 mile per gallon ethanol consumption, a vehicle consumes 50 gallons of water per mile driven if operated on ethanol fuel (Dominguez-Faus et al., 2009).

Impacts of water usage will be felt at the regional and local levels where water resources are already stressed (NAS, 2007) and researchers have recently begun to tackle these localized issues. According to the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, a single ethanol plant producing 100 million gallons of fuel a year — a capacity quickly becoming the norm — uses as much water annually as a town of approximately 10,000 people (Beeman, 2007).  There is one plant in Iowa which consumes 400 million gallons of water a year and organizations based in the state are not sure that there is enough water to handle the expanding ethanol industry.  Similarly, in Minnesota, plans to build a plant were abandoned because the area lacked the 350 million gallons of water a year that would be needed to make 100 million gallons of ethanol (Beeman, 2007).

In another regional example, Lin & Brunsell (2010), in ongoing research, are analyzing the land-use land-cover changes that would occur as a result of increased biofuel production across the Kansas River Basin, looking specifically at local versus regional climate influences and the impacts to water cycling of changing land use.

Internationally the water issue will likely be much more severe than it is in the United States.  The Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI) estimates that by 2050 the amount of additional water needed for bioenergy production could be equivalent to the amount required by the agricultural sector to feed the world properly (AFP, 2007).  The Science and Development Network, a not-for-profit information organization reports:

In water-short countries, increasing agricultural production of biofuels will simply add to the strain on stressed water resources. Almost all of India's sugarcane — the country's major ethanol crop — is irrigated, as is about 45 percent of China's top biofuel crop, maize. The water needed to process crops into biofuel is negligible compared with the amounts that go to growing them. Research at the International Water Management Institute (IWMI) in Sri Lanka has shown that at a global average, the biomass needed to produce one liter of biofuel evaporates between 1000 and 4000 liters of water, depending on the type of feedstock and conversion techniques used. Unless other, less water-intensive, alternatives for feedstock are considered, biofuels are not environmentally sustainable (Fraiture, 2007).

Recent research by Yang et al. (2009) explores the land and water requirements of biofuel development in China with reference to the government biofuel development plans for 2010 and 2020. The analysts specifically looked at the water footprint of biofuel development and found that the water requirement of China’s bioethanol production targets for 2020 would amount to 32-72 km³ per year, approximately equivalent to the annual discharge of the entire Yellow River.

An Indian-based research company, RNCOS, asserts that biofuel production will not be environmentally sustainable until less-water-consuming alternatives are found (cleantech.com, 2007). Such alternatives are being actively researched and developed. From a water supply perspective, the ideal alternative fuel crops would be drought-tolerant, high-yield plants grown on little irrigation water (Dominguez-Faus et al., 2009). Some researchers are exploring such low-water-consuming alternatives. For example, recent work presented at the IASME/WSEAS International Conference on Energy & Environment highlighted research on using desert plants as energy crops with the primary benefit being that such crops would not compete with conventional agriculture for fresh water. Although desert plants must be irrigated, they can use reclaimed sewage and brackish water (Eshel et al., 2010). In other research, Harto et al. (2010) found that only with advanced biofuels such as fuels from algae and switchgrass could we achieve decarbonization of transportation with tolerable increases in overall water consumption.

Only now, thanks to recent research, are we beginning to understand the full impacts on water consumption of increased biofuel development—and the numbers are overwhelming.  Although the US will not experience the hardest water-related challenges, the impacts internationally will be severe. The development of low-water-consuming alternatives will alleviate the problems, but only partially and perhaps not permanently.

Biofuels and Biodiversity

Current biofuel crops are typically selected based on their need of minimal inputs, ability to tolerate marginal growing conditions, and exhibition of rapid growth rates—three primary traits that also characterize many of the worst invasive species of plants (Barney & DiTomaso, 2010).  It is partly because of the robustness of biofuel crops that increased biofuel production is leading to a significant loss of plant and animal biodiversity worldwide. 

The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity reports that the world is losing plants and species at 100 to 1000 times the natural rate of extinction (CDB, 2006).  Although all of this biodiversity loss is not a result of biofuels development, the biofuels industry is certainly having an impact on the overall extinction rate of species. Estimates show that by 2020 biodiversity will be reduced by about 60 percent in US corn and soybean fields and by about 85 percent in Southeast Asian oil palm plantations compared to unconverted habitat (Fargione et al., 2010).

It is argued that in order to achieve environmental goals and avoid harms to biodiversity, policies need to outline environmental standards for biofuel production.  Such standards are not yet in place (Groom et al., 2008). Without environmental standards, biofuel production and use may result in significant negative consequences for biodiversity through pollution, soil degradation, and climate impacts from their cultivation, transportation, refining, and burning (Groom et al., 2008; worldwatch.org, 2006). These arguments are echoed in a number of articles and sources. Laurance (2007), for example, argues that large-scale biofuel production, along with rising food demands in developing nations, could create acute economic pressures to expand agricultural yields — and such expansion could aggravate biodiversity loss in places like the Amazon.  Heavy water use in cultivation and refining may have an additional negative impact on biodiversity (NAS, 2007). A recent study by the European Environment Agency argues that increased demand for fuel crops could have serious damaging impacts on wildlife, water, and soils (Baxter, 2008).

Biofuel crop production has an impact on the biodiversity of animal life as well. Recent research by Fletcher et al. (2010) shows that vertebrate diversity and abundance are generally lower in biofuel crop habitats relative to the non-crop habitats that these crops may replace. In a study of bird species in oil palm plantations, researchers recently found that abundances of bird species were 60 times lower in fragmented plantations and 200 times lower in dedicated oil palm plantations compared to contiguous forest (Edwards et al., 2010).

Examples of biofuel production’s impact on biodiversity have already been witnessed.  Consider recent palm oil plantations in Indonesia that are encroaching on forests and edging out the endangered orangutan population, worrying European consumers who have begun importing palm oil from Southeast Asia. Or, in Brazil, the Cerrado, a vast landscape of biologically rich forests, brush, and pasture just south of the Amazon, which is coming under pressure as sugar cane cultivation expands (worldwatch.org, 2007).  Sustainable farming and the reduction of biodiversity loss is a critical worldwide issue that extends far beyond the production of biofuel feedstocks.  The overall lack of adoption of sustainable farming techniques may serve as a reason to slow biofuel feedstock production until more sustainable farming techniques can be used on a wider scale.

How to make biofuel crop production a more environmentally friendly process is a critical conservation question (Edwards et al., 2010). Just as the solution to water consumption may be through the cultivation of a select group of low-water-consuming crops, the solution to preserving biodiversity may be through cultivation of crops having a lower diversity effect. For example, research shows that diversity effects are greater for corn than for pine and poplar, which can also be used as a biomass feedstock. Further, conversion of row-crop fields to grasslands dedicated to biofuels could actually increase local diversity and abundance of birds (Fletcher et al., 2010). Mitigating the impact to biodiversity of biofuel production requires targeting biofuel production to degraded and abandoned cropland and rangeland; increasing crop yields and livestock production efficiency; use of wastes, residues, and wildlife-friendly crops; and compensatory offsite mitigation for residual direct and indirect impacts (Fargione et al., 2010). Through the use of these techniques, the overall impact of biofuels on biodiversity can be reduced and, with the right combination of plants and farming technique, potentially even reversed.

In the next, and final, installment of this article series, I will discuss two closing critical issues of biofuel and biomass energy development: biofuel impacts on job creation and the role of government funding in biofuel innovation. 

References

AFP. (2007). Water for biofuels or food? Retrieved 11 October, 2010, from http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/1542/water-biofuels-or-food

Bank, W. (2008). World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development. Washington, DC: The World Bank.

Barney, J. N., & DiTomaso, J. M. (2010). Invasive Species Biology, Ecology, Management and Risk Assessment: Evaluating and Mitigating the Invasion Risk of Biofuel Crops Biotechnology in Agriculture and Forestry, 66(3), 263-284.

Baxter, C. (2008). Biofuels linked to European biodiversity loss. Retrieved 11 October, 2010, from http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2208641/biofuels-linked-european

Beeman, P. (2007). Water use: Biofuel plants' thirst creates water worries. Retrieved 11 October, 2010, from http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070603/BUSINESS01/706030323/1029/BUSINESS

CDB. (2006). Global Biodiversity Outlook 2. Montreal: UNEP Convention on Biological Diversity.

cleantech.com. (2007). Report says biofuel puts developing countries' water at risk. Retrieved 11 October, 2010, from http://media.cleantech.com/node/1311

Dominguez-Faus, R., Powers, S. E., Burken, J. G., & Alvarez, P. J. (2009). The Water Footprint of Biofuels: A Drink or Drive Issue? Environmental Science and Technology, 43(9), 3005—3010.

Edwards, D. P., Hodgson, J. A., Hamer, K. C., Mitchell, S. L., Ahmad, A. H., Cornell, S. J., et al. (2010). Wildlife-friendly oil palm plantations fail to protect biodiversity effectively. Conservation Letters, 3(4), 236—242.

Eshel, A., Zilberstein, A., Alekparov, C., Eilam, T., Oren, I., Sasson, Y., et al. (2010). Biomass production by desert halophytes: alleviating the pressure on food production. Paper presented at the 5th IASME/WSEAS International Conference on Energy & Environment, Cambridge, UK.

Fargione, J. E., Plevin, R. J., & Hill, J. D. (2010). The Ecological Impact of Biofuels. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 41, 351-377.

Fingerman, K. R., Torn, M. S., O’Hare, M. H., & Kammen, D. M. (2010). Accounting for the water impacts of ethanol production Environmental Research Letters, 5(1).

Fletcher, R. J., Robertson, B. A., Evans, J., Doran, P. J., Alavalapati, J. R., & Schemske, D. W. (2010). Biodiversity conservation in the era of biofuels: risks and opportunities. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

Fraiture, C. d. (2007). Biofuel crops could drain developing world dry. Retrieved 10 October, 2010, from http://www.scidev.net/en/opinions/biofuel-crops-could-drain-developing-world-dry.html

Groom, M., Gray, E., & Townsend, P. (2008). Biofuels and Biodiversity: Principles for Creating Better Policies for Biofuel Production. Conservation Biology, 22(3), 602-609.

Harto, C., Meyers, R., & Williams, E. (2010). Life cycle water use of low-carbon transport fuels. Energy Policy, 38(9), 4933-4944.

Laurance, W. F. (2007). Have we overstated the tropical biodiversity crisis? Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 22(2), 65-70.

Lienden, A. R. V., Gerbens-Leenes, P. W., Hoekstra, A. Y., & Meer, T. H. V. D. (2010). Biofuel Scenarios in a Water Perspective: The Global Blue and Green Water Footprint of Road Transport in 2030. Delft, Netherlands: UNESCO Institute for Water Education.

Lin, P.-L., & Brunsell, N. A. (2010). Implications of altering land use for biofuel production on carbon and water cycling in the central US. Paper presented at the 29th Conference on Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, Keystone, CO.

Meyer, P. E. (2009a, 08). Biofuel Review Part 1: Biofuel Basics. Retrieved 27 October, 2009, from http://www.todaysengineer.org/2009/Aug/biofuels-pt1.asp

Meyer, P. E. (2009b, 11). Biofuel Review Part 2: Emissions Impacts and Infrastructure Development. Retrieved 16 November, 2009, from http://www.todaysengineer.org/2009/Nov/Biofuels-pt2.asp

Meyer, P. E. (2010a). Biofuel Review Part 3: Land Availability, Conversion, and Deforestation. Retrieved 18 February, 2010, from http://www.todaysengineer.org/2010/Jan/Biofuels-pt3.asp

Meyer, P. E. (2010b). Biofuel Review Part 4: Food vs. Fuel and Profit vs. Hunger. Retrieved 01 June, 2010, from http://www.todaysengineer.org/2010/Jun/biofuels-pt4.asp

NAS. (2007). Water implications of biofuels production in the United States. Washington, DC: National Academies and National Academy of Science.

worldwatch.org. (2006). Biofuels for Transportation: Global Potential and Implications for Sustainable Agriculture and Energy in the 21st Century. Washington, DC: WorldWatch Institute.

worldwatch.org. (2007). Food and Fuel: Biofuels Could Benefit World’s Undernourished. Retrieved 10 October, 2010, from http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5300

Yang, H., Zhou, Y., & Liu, J. (2009). Land and water requirements of biofuel and implications for food supply and the environment in China. Energy Policy, 37(5), 1876-1885

Dr. Patrick E. Meyer is Principal at Meyer Energy Research Consulting, Newark, Delaware, and has provided consulting services for IEEE-USA’s Energy Policy Committee, the IEEE New Technology Connections Portal, and the IEEE Smart Grid Portal.  Holding a Ph.D. in Energy and Environmental Policy from the University of Delaware, Meyer specializes in alternative energy, electricity, and fuel technology policy analysis; global sustainable energy systems; and energy and environmental systems modeling and analysis. Meyer is a member of IEEE and the IEEE-USA Communications Committee, and is IEEE-USA Today’s Engineer Energy, Environment & Sustainability Editor.  Starting in January, Meyer will serve on Capitol Hill as the 2011 IEEE-USA Congressional Fellow.

Comments may be submitted to todaysengineer@ieee.org.