(Page 2 of 2)
Water everywhere: Total water requirements for the irrigation and conversion of one liter of ethanol by state, as well as the total water used in ethanol production by state.
Environmental Science and Technology
The U.S. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 mandates that ethanol produced using existing technologies will have to increase from the 34 billion liters produced in 2008 to 57 billion liters per year by 2015. This includes the more arid western states, where corn-based ethanol is currently produced.
Jerry Schnoor of the University of Iowa, in Iowa City, says that ethanol producers are already planning additional production facilities in all states to meet the 2015 goals. "We're already in an unsustainable situation in terms of water use, already drawing down aquifers like the Ogallala," Schnoor says of the vast underground water source stretching from South Dakota to northern Texas. "This would exacerbate that decline if we expand in these irrigation states."
Geoff Cooper, vice president of research at the Renewable Fuels Association in Washington D.C., questions the researchers' claim that water use has tripling as ethanol production has doubled. "The bulk of expansion from '05 to '08 occurred in the central corn belt--places that don't irrigate corn," he says. "There is a finite limit to how much ethanol you can put in water-constrained areas. We are not putting ethanol plants into areas where water is severely limited."
Suh is also optimistic that water use can be reduced while ethanol production continues to grow. He says that agricultural land that has been set aside for conservation in regions that do not require irrigation could be brought back into production, and genetically engineered corn could maintain high yields with lower water requirements.
"I'm very optimistic we can achieve the ethanol production mandate without sacrificing water security in the U.S.," he says. Schnoor adds that ethanol production could expand to the south and east, where land is cheaper and water is more plentiful.
Pimentel, however, disagrees. "You read the paper and the conclusion is certainly that it will require more and more water, but [Suh] is from Minnesota, and you have to be cautious because in Minnesota they are promoting ethanol," he says.
The study was funded in part by the Department of Energy and the state of Minnesota.
Rain and floods in the corn-growing Midwest could drive up the costs of producing the biofuel.
Demand for corn-derived fuel is driving up food prices, but new technologies could help.
I wonder how much worse this is compared to producing a barrel of oil from the oil sands in Alberta.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athabasca_Oil_Sands#Water
Beef takes 25 times more water per lb than what it takes to grow a lb of corn.
I wish the farm industry would put a little more money toward research into Cellulosic ethanol.
Or just another plant that requires less fertilizer/water/pesticides.
They spend all this time and energy trying to perfect corn, and it is a dead end for producing fuel.
It is a perfect example of entrenched interest being to stupid to see the writing on the wall.
Sweet Sorghum grows well all the way to Canada and can produce as much molasses sugar per acre as sugar cane. You can feed the waste to cattle after the sugars are squeezed. You could also use the waste for cellulose to sugar technology and produce more ethanol. Sweet sorghum also requires much less water and chemical additives than corn or sugar cane. Algae, switchgrass, and other plants are also much better for producing biofuels of many kinds.
Politicians, lawyers, bean counters, and farmers unwilling to try new ideas are the problem.
The main areas where corn is grown and processed have a superabundance of rainfall. I live in the middle of Illinois corn country. We have so much rain that it is not even possible to get the equipment in the field some springs. We had over 50 inches last year! None of these posts refer to the simple fact that nature uses water over and over again. Pull out your Jr. High School text book and look up transpiration!
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
Our list of the 50 most innovative companies, including the following:
On Twitter
Become a Fan on Facebook
Subscribe to the Feed
lasertekk
146 Comments
Once again
With each report, the deck continues to stack against ethanol. Production should have been outlawed yesterday.
Reply
USABORN1
1 Comment
Re: Once again
It only takes 3 gallons or less to convert corn to 1 gallon of ethanol. Anybody can inflate numbers to make it look bad. How much water does it take to make a gallon of gas?? Or even a ream of paper?? I guarantee it is much less than ethanol.
It takes an average of 2 gallons of water to brush you teeth, over 7 to flush the toilet,37 per gallon of crude, or 16 to convert beets to sugar. So 3 gallons to convert corn to ethnol is squat, and all the money is staying in the USA...
Reply
mfolbe
49 Comments
Re: Once again
You really believe it uses that much water to brush your teeth. Next time, try it with the water turned off while you are brushing.
Ethanol is just bad stuff all around. It can't be transported. It's energy content sucks. It relies on federal subsidies to be profitable. It takes special engines to even use it because it gunks up our old engines. You have to have congress mandate its use or it would just go away. Maybe if gas was $4 a gallon again, it would be considered, but not at $2. Nobody wants it.
Reply
bill_paterson47
1 Comment
Re: Once again
1 gallon of Ethanol = 3 gallons of water; POET's less than that.
1 lb of hamburger = 4 gallons of water
1 chicken = 11.6 gallons of water
1 gallon of oil = 41.5 gallons of water
Know your facts before you start spreading rumors. Alot of lives, jobs, and reputations are at stake. All because big oil has more money and power to inflate the information conveyed to our public, we are all fools for not giving credit where it's due.
My statistics are from Iowa State University Extension/epa/usgs
Reply
MarionMeads
9 Comments
Re: Once again
There is something wrong with the statistics on the hamburger figure.
Consider this:
How much water does a cow drink before it is processed into Hamburger? Then add to it the many pounds of water to produce the many pounds of grass, corn or alfalfa that the cow eats.
Fred Pearce, author of When the Rivers Run Dry, helps us quickly understand it by the few numbers he gives:
* to grow a pound of rice: 250 to 650 gallons of water
* to grow a pound of wheat: 130 gallons
* to produce a quart of milk: 500 to 1000 gallons
* to produce a pound of cheese: 650 gallons
* to produce a 1/4 pound of burger: 3000 gallons
He kindly puts water use into perspective in annual terms:
* 1 ton (265 gallons) for drinking
* 50 to 100 tons (13,250 to 26,500 gallons) around the house
* 1500 to 2000 tons (397,500 to 530,000 gallons) for food and clothing
Reply