Energy Return on Investment (EROI), Liquid Fuel Production, and Consequences for Wildlife

  • Jason M. Townsend
  • Charles A. S. Hall
  • Timothy A. Volk
  • David Murphy
  • Godfrey Ofezu
  • Bobby Powers
  • Amos Quaye
  • Michelle Serapiglia
Chapter

Abstract

Current liquid-fuel supplies in the United States are derived primarily from relatively inexpensive fossil fuels. The low cost and widespread availability of petroleum has, over the last 150 years, facilitated enormous growth in the U.S. and global economies, in their respective human populations and resource consumption, and in their attendant impacts on ecosystems worldwide. Concerns are growing, however, as to whether alternative fuel sources can fill the void left by future declines in the supply of this inexpensive and energy-rich resource, concepts expressed in phrases such as “Peak Oil,” “end of cheap oil,” and “second half of the age of oil.”

A key concept in the assessment of current and future fuel supplies is the Energy Return on Investment (EROI), the amount of energy used in the extraction and processing of a fuel source divided by the energy gained from these activities. The EROI of petroleum was as high as 80:1 — 100:1 in the first third of the 20th century. However, both the quantity of oil remaining to be exploited and its EROI are declining to from 10:1 to 20:1. Biomass is being promoted as a renewable feedstock that can be used to produce liquid fuels as a domestic alternative to current petroleum-based liquid fuels, which are derived mostly and increasingly from imported sources. However, our summary shows that the EROI of liquid fuels from different alternative sources varies from less than 1:1 to about 10:1, far less than even present day petroleum. In addition, the potential supply from these sources is limited and is projected to replace no more than 30% of current petroleum use in the U.S. by 2030 under very optimistic assumptions. These lower grade resources are expected to have greater impacts on wildlife per unit delivered to society than present fuels, primarily due to the extensive nature of the resource and the potential conversion of forested lands to agriculture. While the production of large amounts of biomass feedstocks has the potential to add a modest amount of badly needed liquid fuel to our national supplies, there are sustainability, biodiversity, climate change, and water resource issues that need to be addressed in order to ensure that these resources are used as effectively as possible and with the least negative impact. Here we review the literature on several major potential biomass-based liquid fuels for use in the U.S.: corn ethanol, sugar-cane ethanol, lignocellulosic ethanol, and vegetable oil biodiesel. For each, we summarize the fuel’s EROI, potential magnitude, and potential impacts on the environment and wildlife.

References

  1. 1.
    Adelman MA, Lynch MC (1997) Fixed view of resource limits creates undue pessimism. Oil Gas J 95:56–60Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Alén R (2000) Structure and chemical composition of wood. In: Stenius P (ed) Forest products chemistry (papermaking science and technology, book 3). TAPPI Fapet Oy, Helsinki, pp 12–57Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amidon TE (2006) The biorefinery in New York: woody biomass into commercial ethanol. Pulp Pap Can 107:T150–T153 (147–150)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Amidon TE, Wood CD, Shupe AM, Wang Y, Graves M, Liu S (2008) Biorefinery: conversion of woody biomass to chemicals, energy and materials. J Biobased Mater Bioenerg 2:100–120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ash M, Dohlman E (2006) Oil crops situation and annual outlook yearbook. U.S. Department of Agriculture OCS-2006Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO) (2007). http://www.peakoil.net/Default.htm. Accessed 3 Aug 2007
  7. 7.
    Best LB, Campa H, Kemp KE, Robel RJ, Ryan MR, Savidge JA, Weeks HP, Winterstein SR (1997) Bird abundance and nesting in CRP fields and cropland in the Midwest: a regional approach. Wildl Soc Bull 25:864–877Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Biomass Research and Development Board (BRDB) (2008) National biofuels action plan. U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Biomass Research Development Board. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/pdfs/nbap.pdf. Accessed 30 July 2010.
  9. 9.
    Boddey R, Oliveira M, Urquiaga S, Reis V (1995) Biological nitrogen fixation in sugar cane: a key to energetically viable biofuel production. Plant Soil 174:195–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boulding KE (1966) The economics of the coming spaceship earth. In: Jarrett H (ed) Environmental quality in a growing economy. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 3–14Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Braunbeck O, Bauen A, Rosillo-Calle F, Cortez I (1999) Prospects for green cane harvesting and cane residue use in Brazil. Biomass Bioenerg 17:495–506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Campbell CJ, Laherrère JH. (1998). The end of cheap oil. Scientific Am March:78–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cleveland CJ (2005) Net energy from the extraction of oil and gas in the United States. Energy Int J 30:769–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cleveland CJ, O’Connor PA (2011) Energy return on investment (EROI) of oil shale. Sustainability 3:2307–2322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cleveland CJ, Constanza R, Hall CAS, Kauffmann R (1984) Energy and the U.S. economy: a biophysical perspective. Science 225:890–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cleveland C, Hall CAS, Herendeen R (2006) Energy returns on ethanol production. Science (letters) 312:1746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Clyde N (2004) Canola prices will stay strong through ’04. Canola Digest (March/April). Canola Council of Canada, Winnipeg.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cortez LAB, Rosillo-Calle F. (1998). Towards ProAlcool II: a review of the Brazilian bioethanol programme. Biomass Bioenerg 14:115–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Czech B (2000) Shoveling fuel for a runaway train: errant economists, shameful spenders, and a plan to stop them all. University of California Press, BerkeleyGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Czech B (2008) Prospects for reconciling the conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation with technological progress. Conserv Biol 22:1389–1398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Davis A, Gold R (2009) U.S. biofuel boom running on empty. Wall Str J (Aug 27). http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125133578177462487.html. Accessed 21 Feb 2013
  22. 22.
    Deffeyes KJ (2005) Beyond oil: the view from Hubbert’s peak. Hill and Wang, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dhondt AA, Wrege PH (2003) Avian biodiversity studies in short-rotation woody crops. Final report prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy under cooperative agreement No. DE-FC36-96GO10132. Cornell University Laboratory of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Dhondt AA, Wrege PH, Sydenstricker KV, Cerretani J (2004) Clone preference by nesting birds in short-rotation coppice plantations in central and western New York. Biomass Bioenerg 27:429–435CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Dominguez-Faus R, Powers SE, Burken JG, Alvarez PJ (2009) The water footprint of biofuels: a drink or drive issue? Environ Sci Technol 43:3005–3010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Downing M, McLaughlin S, Walsh M (1995) Energy, economic, and environmental implications of production of grasses as biomass feedstock. In: Proceedings, second biomass conference of the Americas: energy, environment, agriculture, and industry. Meeting held 21–24 Aug 1995, Portland, Oregon. National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, Colorado, USA, pp 288–297Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ebringerova A, Heinze T (2000) Naturally occurring xylans: structures, isolation procedures, and properties. Macromol Rapid Commun 21:542–556CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fargione J, Hill J, Tilman D, Polasky S, Hawthorne P (2008) Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science 319:1235–1238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Farrell AE, Plevin RJ, Turner BT, Jones AD, Ortare M, Kammen DM (2006) Ethanol can contribute to energy and environmental goals. Science 31:506–508CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fitzherbert EB, Struebig MJ, Morel A, Danielsen F, Brühl CA, Donald PF, Phalan B (2008) How will oil palm expansion affect biodiversity? Trends Ecol Evol 23:538–545Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Foreman L, Livezey J (2002) Characteristics and production costs of U.S. soybean farms. U.S. Department of Agriculture Statistical Bulletin No. 974-4Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fukuda H, Kondo A, Noda H (2001) Biodiesel fuel production by transesterification of oils. J BioSci Bioeng 92:403–416Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gagnon N, Hall CAS, Brinker L (2009) A preliminary investigation of energy return on energy invested for global oil and gas production. Energies 2:490–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Goldenberg J, Moreira J (1999) The alcohol program. Energy Policy 27:229–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Goldenberg J, Coelho ST, Nastari PM, Lucon O (2004) The ethanol learning curve-the Brazilian experience. Biomass Bioenerg 26:301–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Graboski MS, McCormick RL (1998) Combustion of fat and vegetable oil derived fuels in diesel engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci 24:301–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Guilford MC, Hall CAS, O’Connor P, Cleveland CJ (2011) A new long term assessment of energy return on investment (EROI) for U.S. oil and gas discovery and production. Sustainability 3:1866–1887CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Haas MJ, McAloon AJ, Yee WC, Foglia TA (2006) A process model to estimate biodiesel production costs. Bioresour Technol 97:671–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hall CAS (1972) Migration and metabolism in a temperate stream ecosystem. Ecology 53:585–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Hall C (2011) Introduction to special issue on new studies in EROI (Energy Return on Investment). Sustainability 3:1773–1777CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hall CAS, Benemann JR (2011) Oil from algae? BioScience 61:741–742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hall CAS, Day JW (2009) Revisiting the limits to growth after Peak Oil. Am Sci 97:230–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hall CAS, Klitgaard K (2012) Energy and the wealth of nations: understanding the biophysical economy. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hall CAS, Cleveland CJ, Kaufmann R (1986) Energy and resource quality: the ecology of the economic process. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hall CAS, Balogh S, Murphy D (2009) What is the minimum EROI that a sustainable society must have? Energies 2:25–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Hall CAS, Dale BE, Pimentel D (2011) Seeking to understand the reasons for different energy return on investment (EROI) estimates for biofuels. Sustainability 3:2413–2432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hamelinck C, Faaij A, den Uil H, Boerrigter H (2004) Production of Fischer-Trosch transportation fuels from biomass. Energy 29:1743–1771CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Hammerschlag R (2006) Ethanol’s energy return on investment: a survey of the literature 1990-present. Environ Sci Technol 40:1744–1750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Hill J (2007) Environmental costs and benefits of transportation biofuel production from food- and lignocullulose-based energy crops: a review. Agronom Sustain Dev 27:1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hill J, Nelson E, Tilman D, Polasky S, Tiffany D (2006) Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 103:11206–11210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Hirsch RL, Bezdek RH, Wendling RM (2005) Peaking of world oil production: impacts, mitigation and risk management. U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory. Unpublished Report. http://www.netl.doe.gov/publications/others/pdf/oil_peaking_netl.pdf. Accessed 13 May 2010
  52. 52.
    Hopkinson CS, Day JW (1980) Net energy analysis of alcohol production from sugarcane. Science 207:302–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Inderwildi OI, King DA (2009) Quo vadis biofuels? Energy Environ Sci 2:343–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    International Energy Agency (IEA) (2011) Technology roadmap: biofuels for transport. International Energy Agency, Paris, France. http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/Biofuels_Roadmap.pdf. Accessed 25 Feb 2013
  55. 55.
    International Network for Sustainable Energy (INFORSE) (2006) Alternative fuels for transportation: ethanol. http://www.inforse.dk/europe/dieret/altfuels/ethanol.htm. Accessed 2 Aug 2007
  56. 56.
    Jeffries TW, Jin Y-S (2000) Ethanol and thermotolerance in the bioconversion of xylose by yeasts. Adv Appl Microbiol 47:221–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Jin Y-S, Laplaza J, Jeffries T (2004) Saccharomyces cerevisiae engineered for xylose metabolism exhibits a respiratory response. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 70:6816–6825Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Keoleian GA, Volk TA (2005) Renewable energy from willow biomass crops: life cycle energy, environmental and economic performance. Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:385–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Kim S, Holtzapple MT (2005) Lime pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover. Bioresour Technol 96:1994–2006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kim TH, Lee YY (2005) Pretreatment and fractionation of corn stover by ammonia recycle percolation process. Bioresour Technol 96:2007–2013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Koh LP, Wilcove DS (2008) Is oil palm agriculture really destroying tropical biodiversity? Conserv Lett 1:60–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Lave LB, Griffin WM (2006) Import ethanol, not oil. Issues Sci Technol 22:40–42Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Liebig MA, Schmer MR, Vogel KP, Mitchell RB (2008) Soil carbon storage by switchgrass grown for bioenergy. Bioenergy Res 1:215–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Liu C, Wyman CE (2005) Partial flow of compressed-hot water through corn stover to enhance hemicellulose sugar recovery and enzymatic digestibility of cellulose. Bioresour Technol 96:1978–1985CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Lloyd TA, Wyman CE (2005) Combined sugar yields for dilute sulfuric acid pretreatment of corn stover followed by enzymatic hydrolysis of the remaining solids. Bioresour Technol 96:1967–1977CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Londo M, Dekker J, ter Keurs W (2005) Willow short-rotation coppice for energy and breeding birds: an exploration of potentials in relation to management. Biomass Bioenerg 28:281–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Lynch MC (2002) Forecasting oil supply: theory and practice. Quart Rev Econ Financ 42:373–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Lynd LR (1996) Overview and evaluation of fuel ethanol from cellulosic biomass. Annu Rev Energy Environ 21:403–465CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Lynd LR, Wang MQ (2004) A product-nonspecific framework for evaluating the potential biomass-based products to displace fossil fuels. J Ind Ecol 7:17–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Ma F, Hanna MA (1999) Biodiesel production: a review. Bioresour Technol 70:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Macedo IC (1998) Greenhouse gas emission and energy balances in bio-ethanol production and utilization in Brazil (1996). Biomass Bioenerg 14:77–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Maciel M (2006) Ethanol from Brazil and the USA. ASPO-USA/Energy Bulletin. Paper presented at ASPO-USA 2006 Peak Oil Conference, 26–27 Oct, Boston, Massachusetts, USAGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Maguire K (2012) Prices or politics? The influence of markets and political party changes on oil and gas development in the Unitied States. Energy Econ 34:2013–2020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Malcolm S, Aillery M (2009) Growing crops for biofuels has spillover effects. Amber Waves, March 2009. http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/March09/Features/Biofuels.htm. Accessed 30 July 2010
  75. 75.
    Milbrandt A (2005) A geographic perspective on the current biomass resource availability in the United States. NREL/TP-560-39181. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, USAGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Mok WSL, Antal MJ Jr (1992). Uncatalyzed solvolysis of whole biomass hemicellulose by hot compressed liquid water. Ind Eng Chem Res 31:1157–1161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Mosier N, Hendrickson R, Ho N, Sedlak M, Ladisch MR (2005) Optimization of pH controlled liquid hot water pretreatment of corn stover. Bioresour Technol 96:1986–1993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Murphy DJ, Hall CAS, Dale M, Cleveland C (2011a) Order from chaos: a preliminary protocol for determining the EROI of fuels. Sustainability 3:1888–1907CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Murphy DJ, Hall CAS, Powers B (2011b) New perspectives on the energy return on (energy) investment (EROI) of corn ethanol. Environ Dev Sustain 13:179–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Murray LD, Best LB, Jacobsen TJ, Braster ML (2003) Potential effects on grassland birds of converting marginal cropland to switchgrass biomass production. Biomass Bioenerg 25:167–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) (2012) Corn. Rooted in history. 2012 world of corn. http://www.ncga.com/uploads/useruploads/woc_2012.pdf. Accessed 21 Sept 2012
  82. 82.
    National Energy Board (NEB) (2005) Response to David Pimentel biodiesel life analysis. http://eerc.ra.utk.edu/etcfc/docs/pr/PimentelStudy-NBBDetailedResponse~July05.pdf. Accessed 2 Aug 2007
  83. 83.
    Nelson RG, Schrock MD (2006) Energetic and economic feasibility associated with the production, processing, and conversion of beef tallow to a substitute diesel fuel. Biomass Bioenerg 30:584–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Oliveira de MED, Vaughan BE, Rykiel EJ Jr (2005) Ethanol as fuel: energy, carbon dioxide balances, and ecological footprint. BioScience 55:593–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Odum HT (1971) Environment, power, and society. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Perlack RD, Wright LL, Turhollow AF, Graham RL, Stokes BJ, Erbach DC (2005) Biomass as feedstock for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry: the technical feasibility of a billion-ton annual supply. ORNL/TM-2005/66. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, USAGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Pimentel D, Patzek TW (2005) Ethanol production using corn, switchgrass, and wood; biodiesel production using soybean and sunflower. Nat Resour Res 14:65–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Poisson A, Hall CAS (in press) Time series EROI for Canadian oil, gas, and tar sands. EnergiesGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Radich A (2004) Biodiesel performance, costs, and use. Energy information analysis paper http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biodiesel/index.html. Accessed 2 Aug 2007
  90. 90.
    Rodenhouse NL, Best LB, O’Connor RJ, Bollinger EK (1995) Effects of agriculture practices and farmland structures. In: Martin TE, Finch DM (eds) Ecology and management of neotropical birds: a synthesis and review of critical issues. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 269–293Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Roth AM, Sample DW, Ribic CA, Paine L, Undersander DJ, Bartelt GA (2005) Grassland bird response to harvesting switchgrass as a biomass energy crop. Biomass Bioenerg 28:490–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Sage RB, Robertson PA (1996) Factors affecting songbird communities using new short rotation coppice habitats in spring. Bird Study 43:201–213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Semere T, Slater FM (2007) Ground flora, small mammal and bird species diversity in miscanthus (Miscanthus  ×  giganteus) and reed canary-grass (Phalaris arundinacea) fields. Biomass Bioenerg 31:20–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Shapouri H, Salassi M (2006) The economic feasibility of ethanol production from sugar in the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Chief Economist, Office of Energy Policy and New Uses, and Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USAGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Shapouri H, Duffield JA, Wang M (2002) The energy balance of corn ethanol: an update. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Office of the Chief Economist, Office of Energy Policy and New Uses. Agricultural Economic Report No. 814Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Shay EG (1993) Diesel fuel from vegetable oils: status and opportunities. Biomass Bioenerg 4:227–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Sheehan J, Camobreco V, Duffield J, Graboski M, Shapouri H (1998) Life cycle inventory of biodiesel and petroleum diesel for use in an urban bus. Final report. NREL/SR-580-24089 UC Category 1503. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado, USAGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Shiflet TN, Darby GM (1985) Forages and soil conservation. In: Heath ME, Barnes RF, Metcalfe DS (eds) Forages: the science of grassland agriculture. Iowa State University Press, Ames, pp 21–32Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Solomon BD, Barnes JR, Halvorsen KE. (2007). Grain and cellulosic ethanol: history, economics, and energy policy. Biomass Bioenerg 31:416–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Teymouri F, Laureono-Perez L, Alizedeh H, Dale BE (2005) Optimization of the ammonia fiber explosion (AFEX) treatment parameters for enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover. Bioresour Technol 96:2014–2018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Tilman D, Hill J, Lehman C (2006) Carbon-negative biofuels from low-input high-diversity grassland biomes. Science 314:1598–1600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (2006) EU-25. Oilseeds and products. EU rapeseed crop reaches record levels as biofuels market boost demand. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Foreign Agricultural Service, GAIN Report Number: E36035Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) (2006) Breaking the biological barriers to cellulosic ethanol: a joint research agenda. DOE/SC-0095. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science and Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy http://genomicscience.energy.gov/biofuels/2005workshop/2005low_bioprocess.pdf. Accessed 24 May 2010
  104. 104.
    U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) (2011) U.S. billion-ton update: biomass supply for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry. R. D. Perlack and B. J. Stokes, leads. ORNL/TM-2011/224. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak RidgeGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2006) Eliminating MTBE in gasoline in 2006. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Washington, DC, USA. http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/feature_articles/2006/mtbe2006/mtbe2006.pdf. Accessed 24 May 2010
  106. 106.
    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2012a) Annual energy review 2012. DOE/EIA-0383. U.S. Energy Information Administration, Washington, DC, USA. http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/. Accessed 21 Sept 2012
  107. 107.
    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2012b) Petroleum products consumption. Petroleum supply annual 2006, Volume 1. http://www.eia.gov/petroleum/supply/annual/volume1/. Accessed 2 Oct 2012
  108. 108.
    U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) (2012c) U.S. crude oil, natural gas, and ng liquids proved reserves report. http://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/crudeoilreserves/index.cfm. Accessed 25 Feb 2013
  109. 109.
    U.S. Environmental Protecton Agency (EPA) (2002) Comprehensive analysis of biodiesel impacts on exhaust emissions. EPA420-P-02-001. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Transportation and Air Quality, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (2000) World energy assessment team: the world energy assessment 2000. U.S. Geological Survey digital data series 60, version 2.1.Google Scholar
  111. 111.
    United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (2004) World energy assessment overview: 2004 update. United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, World Energy Council, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Van Gerpen J, Soylu S, Tat M (1999) Evaluation of the lubricity of soybean oil-based additives in diesel fuel. ASAE Paper No. 996134. The American Society of Agricultural Engineers 1999 Annual Meeting, Toronto, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Volk TA, Verwijst T, Tharakan PJ, Abrahamson LP, White EH (2004) Growing fuel: a sustainability assessment of willow biomass crops. Front Ecol Environ 2:411–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Walter WD, Vercauteren KC, Gilsdorf JM, Hygnstrom SE (2009) Crop, native vegetation, and biofuels: response of white-tailed deer to changing management priorities. J Wildl Manage 73:339–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Wang M (1999) ANL/ESD-39; GREET 1.5-transportation fuel-cycle model vol.1: methodology, development, use, and results. Argonne National Laboratory, ArgonneGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    West TO, Marland G (2002) A synthesis of carbon sequestration, carbon emissions, and net carbon flux in agriculture: comparing tillage practices in the United States. Agric Ecosyst Environ 91:217–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Westcott PC 2007. Ethanol expansion in the United States: how will the agricultural sector adjust? FDS-07D-01. U.S. Department of Agriculure, Economic Research Service, Washington, DC, USAGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    White LA (1959) The evolution of culture: the development of civilization to the fall of Rome. McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Wu M, Wu Y, Wang M (2006) Energy and emission benefits of alternative transportation liquid fuels derived from switchgrass: a fuel life cycle assessment. Biotechnol Progr 22:1012–1024CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jason M. Townsend
    • 1
  • Charles A. S. Hall
    • 1
  • Timothy A. Volk
    • 1
  • David Murphy
    • 1
  • Godfrey Ofezu
    • 1
  • Bobby Powers
    • 1
  • Amos Quaye
    • 1
  • Michelle Serapiglia
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Environmental and Forest BiologyState University of New York (SUNY)SyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations