Biofuel Production in Italy and Europe: Benefits and Costs, in the Light of the Present European Union Biofuel Policy

  • Sergio Ulgiati
  • Daniela Russi
  • Marco Raugei

Abstract

We present and critically evaluate in this paper biofuel production options in Italy, in order to provide the reader with the order of magnitudes of the performance indicators involved. Also, we discuss biofuel viability and desirability at the European level, according to the recent EU regulations and energy policy decisions.

Fuels from biomass are most often proposed as substitutes for fossil fuels, in order to meet present and future shortages. Although the scientific literature on biofuel production techniques is abundant, comprehensive evaluations of large-scale biofuel production as a response to fossil energy depletion are few and controversial. The complexity of the assessments involved and the ideological biases in the research of both opponents and proponents of biofuel production make it difficult to weigh the contrasting information found in the literature. Moreover, the dubious validity of extrapolating results obtained at the level of an individual biofuel plant or farm to entire societies or ecosystems has rarely been addressed explicitly. After questioning the feasibility of a large-scale biofuels option based upon yields from case studies, we explore what are the constraints that affect the option even in the case of improved production performance.

Keywords

Biomass biofuels carbon dioxide emissions land requirement 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AA. VV., 2001. White Paper “European transport policy for 2010: time to decide”. http://ec.europa.eu/transport/white_paper/_en.htm, European Commission, Bruxelles. Last web contact 24 August 2007.Google Scholar
  2. AA.VV., 2005. European Environment Agency. Annual European Community greenhouse gas inventory 1990–2003 and inventory report 2005. http://reports.eea.europa.eu/ technical_report_2005_4/en. Last web contact 24 August 2007.Google Scholar
  3. AA.VV., 2006. An EU Strategy for Biofuels. European Commission, Bruxelles. http://ec.europa.eu/comm/agriculture/biomass/biofuel/index_it.htm, Last web contact 24 August 2007.Google Scholar
  4. Bargigli S., Raugei M., and Ulgiati S., 2004. Mass flow analysis and mass-based indicators. In: Handbook of Ecological Indicators for Assessment of Ecosystem Health. CRC Press, 439p.Google Scholar
  5. Barta, P., and Spencer, J., 2006. Crude Awakening. As Alternative Energy Heats Up, Environmental Concerns Grow. Wall Street Journal Online, 5 Dicember 2006. http://online.wsj.com/ article_email/SB116501541088338547-lMyQjAxMDE2NjA1NTAwMTU1Wj.html. Last web contact 24 August 2007.Google Scholar
  6. BBC, 2007. Italians facing pasta price rise. By David Willey, BBC News, Rome http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6287850.stm; Last Updated: Tuesday, 10 July 2007, 11:52 GMT 12:52 UK.Google Scholar
  7. Beer T., Grant T., Watson H., and Olaru D., 2004. Life-Cycle Emissions Analysis of Fuels for Light Vehicles. Report HA93A-C837/1/F5.2E to the Australian Greenhouse Office.Google Scholar
  8. Berndes, G., Hoogwijk, M., van den Broek, R., 2003. The contribution of biomass in the future global energy supply: a review of 17 studies. Biomass and Bioenergy 25 (2003) 1–28.Google Scholar
  9. Brown, M.T., and Ulgiati, S., 2004. Emergy Analysis and Environmental Accounting. In: Encyclopedia of Energy, C. Cleveland Editor, Academic Press, Elsevier, Oxford, UK pp. 329–354.Google Scholar
  10. Calabresi, M., 2007. How the rush to biofuels boosts corn prices up (in Italian: Così la corsa al biocarburante impenna le quotazioni del mais). La Repubblica, 19 August 2007, p. 19.Google Scholar
  11. Cavalet, O., 2007. phD thesis at the University of Campinas, preliminary results. Personal communication to one of the Authors of this paper (Ulgiati).Google Scholar
  12. Cavalet, O. and Ortega, E., 2007. Emergy Analysis of Soybean Production and Processing in Brazil. Paper presented to the 5th International Biennial Workshop “Advances in Energy Studies”, Porto Venere, Italy, September 2006. Book of Procedings in press.Google Scholar
  13. CCPCS, Commission Consultative pour la Production de Carburant de Substitution, 1991. Rapport des Travaux du Groupe Numero 1. Paris.Google Scholar
  14. Cleveland, C.J., 2005. Net energy from the extraction of oil and gas in the United States. Energy 30:769–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cleveland, C.J., Costanza, R., Hall, C.A.S., and Kaufmann, R., 1984. Energy and the U.S. economy: a biophysical perspective. Science 255:890–897.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. El-Swaify S.A., Moldenhauer W.C., Lo A., 1985. Soil Erosion and Conservation (Soil Conservation Society of America, Ankeny, IA).Google Scholar
  17. EPA, 2002. A Comprehensive Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on Exhaust Emissions, Draft Technical Report EPA420-P-02-001.Google Scholar
  18. EU, 2003. Directive 2003/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 May 2003 on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels for transport. Official Journal of the European Union. L 123/42, 17.5.2003.Google Scholar
  19. FAO, 2007. Food Outlook. http://www.fao.org/giews/english/fo/. Last contact, 24 August 2007.Google Scholar
  20. Fischer-Kowalski M. 1998 Metabolism: The Intellectual History of Material Flow Analysis Part I, 1860–1970 Journal of Industrial Ecology 2(1):61–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Follet R.F., Gupta S.C., and Hunt P.G., 1987. Soil Fertility and Organic Matter as Critical Components of Production Systems. Soil Science Society of America and American Society of Agronomy, Madison, WI.Google Scholar
  22. Giampietro, M., Ulgiati, S., and Pimentel, D., 1997. Feasibility of Large-Scale Biofuel Production. Does an Enlargement of Scale Change the Picture? BioScience, 47(9):587–600, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Herendeen, R.A., 1998. Embodied Energy, embodied everything ... now what? -In: Advances in Energy Studies Energy Flows in Ecology and Economy. Ulgiati S., Brown M.T., Giampietro M., Herendeen R.A., and Mayumi K. (Eds). Musis Publisher, Roma, Italy; pp. 13–48.Google Scholar
  24. Herendeen, R.A., 2004. Energy analysis and EMERGY analysis—a comparison, Ecological Modelling 178 (2004) 227–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hinterberger F. and Stiller H. (1998). Energy and Material Flows. In: Advances in Energy Flows in Ecology and Economy. Ulgiati S., Brown M.T., Giampiero M., Herendeen R.A., and Mayumi K. (Eds). Musis Publisher, Roma, Italy; pp. 275–286.Google Scholar
  26. Hoogwijk, M., Faaij, A., van den Broek, R., Berndes, G., Gielen, D., and Turkenburg, W., 2003. Exploration of the ranges of the global potential of biomass for energy. Biomass and Bioenergy 25 (2003) 119–133Google Scholar
  27. ISTAT-ASI, 2007. Istituto Nazionale di Statistica (National Institute of Statistics), Roma. Annuario Statistico Italiano 2007. (Statistical Yearbook, 2007).Google Scholar
  28. Lal R., 1989. In Food and Natural Resources, D. Pimentel and C.W. Hall, Eds. (Academic Press, San Diego, 1989), pp. 85–140.Google Scholar
  29. Magaldi D., Bazzoffi P., Bidini D., Frascati F., Gregori E, Lorenzoni P., Miclaus N. and Zanchi C., 1981. Studio interdisciplinare sulla classificazione e la valutazione del territorio: un esempio nel Comune di Pescia (Pistoia). Istituto Sperimentale Studio e Difesa del Suolo, Firenze, Italy, Annali vol. XII, pp. 31–114 (in Italian).Google Scholar
  30. Marland G., and Turhollow A.F., 1991. CO2 emissions from the production and combustion of fuel ethanol from corn. Energy, 16 (11/12):1307–1316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Medici L. and Martinelli E., 1963. Chimica Agraria. Società Editrice Dante Alighieri, Milano. pp. 339.Google Scholar
  32. Monbiot G. (2005). Worse than fossil fuel. The Guardian 12 dicembre 2005. http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2005/12/06/worse-than-fossil-fuel.Google Scholar
  33. Morris R.E., Pollack A.K., Mansell G.E., Lindhjem C., Jia Y., and Wilson G., 2003. Impact of Biodiesel Fuels on Air Quality and Human Health. Report NREL/SR-540-33793 to National Renewable Energy Laboratory, USA.Google Scholar
  34. Nebbia, G., 1990. Alcool carburante, Politica e Economia, III, 21(5):9–10.Google Scholar
  35. Odum H.T., and Odum E.C., 2006. The prosperous way down. Energy 31 (2006) 21–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Odum H.T. and Odum E.C., 2001. A Prosperous Way Down: Principles and Policies. 326 pp., University Press of Colorado.Google Scholar
  37. Odum H.T., 1996. Environmental Accounting. Emergy and Environmental Decision Making. John Wiley & Sons, N.Y.Google Scholar
  38. OTA, 1982. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Impacts of Technology on U.S. Cropland and Rangeland Productivity. (Washington, DC: US Government printing Office).Google Scholar
  39. OTA, 1993. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Potential Environmental Impacts of Bioenergy Crop Production-Background Paper. OTA-BP-E-118 (Washington, DC: US Government printing Office, September 1993). 71pp.Google Scholar
  40. Pimentel D., Harvey C., Resosudarmo P., Sinclair K., Kurz D., McNair M., Crist S., Shpritz L., Fitton L., Saffouri R., and Blair R., 1995. Environmental and Economic Costs of Soil Erosion and Conservation Benefits. Science, 267:1117–1123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rampini, F., 2007. Beijing. The “pig meat” crisis (in Italian: Pechino, scoppia la crisi del maiale). La Repubblica, 1 June 2007, p. 20.Google Scholar
  42. Schmidt-Bleek F., 1993. MIPS re-visited. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin 2:407–412.Google Scholar
  43. Shapouri H., Duffield J.A., and Graboski M.S., 1995. Estimating the Net Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Office of Energy and New Uses. Agricultural Economic Report No. 721, pp. 16.Google Scholar
  44. Taschner K., 1991. Bioethanol: a solution or a new problem. Proceedings of the IX International Symposium on Alcohol Fuels (ISAF). Firenze (Italy), 12–15 November 1991. Vol.3: 922–926.Google Scholar
  45. Triolo L., 1988. Agricoltura Energia Ambiente. Tecnologie meccaniche e chimiche. Consumi e inquinamento. Editori Riuniti. pp. 152.Google Scholar
  46. Triolo L., Mariani A., and Tomarchio L., 1984. L’uso dell’energia nella produzione agricola vegetale in Italia: bilanci energetici e considerazioni metodologiche. ENEA, Italy, RT/FARE/84/12.Google Scholar
  47. Troeh F.R., Hobbs J.A., and Donahue R.L., 1991. Soil and Water Conservation (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
  48. Turkenburg, W.C. (Convening Lead Author), Faaij, A. (Lead Author), et al., 2000. Renewable Energy Technologies. Chapter 7 in World Energy Assessment of the United Nations, UNDP, UNDESA/WEC. UNDP, New York.Google Scholar
  49. USDA. 1993. Agricultural Statistics. United States Department of Agriculture, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  50. USDA. 1994, United States Department of Agriculture. Summary Report 1992 National Resources Inventory. Soil Conservation Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  51. Vitale, R., Boulton, J. W., Lepage, M., Gauthier, M., Qiu, X., and Lamy, S., 2002. “Modelling the Effects of E10 Fuels in Canada”. Emission Inventory Conference Emission Inventory Conference, Florida, USA.Google Scholar
  52. Wackernagel M. and Rees W., 1996. Our Ecological Footprint. New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
  53. World Resources Institute (WRI) 1994. World Resources 1994–95. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sergio Ulgiati
    • 1
  • Daniela Russi
    • 2
  • Marco Raugei
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Sciences for the EnvironmentParthenope University of NapoliCentro Direzionale – Isola C4Italy
  2. 2.Department of Economics and Economic HistoryAutonomous University of BarcelonaCampus de la UABSpain
  3. 3.Department of Sciences for the EnvironmentParthenope University of NapoliCentro Direzionale – Isola C4Italy

Personalised recommendations