Corn ethanol reduces grenhouse gases nearly 30 %
while cellulosic ethanol brings an 85 % reduction.
While the cellulosic biofuel production process has yet to be extensively commercialized, several private companies are developing specialized biorefineries capable of converting tough corn fibers into fuel.
Not exact matches
Midwesterners, for example, might use more
cellulosic waste - based green fuel because of their abundance of farm land,
while Southwesterners use algae - based green fuel.
In fact, the EPA has eased the mandate
while waiting for
cellulosic to hit the market.
While that report was a «game - stopper» for the
cellulosic industry, NAS doesn't shut down the possibility of an algae future, said Mayfield.
As someone that has spent a fair amount of time looking at the GHG impacts of ethanol from a LCA perspective, I think everyone is in agreement that corn is the least beneficial,
while sugarcane and
cellulosic are the most promisisng.
I saw your support for
cellulosic ethanol, but no statement on the logic (or lack thereof) of the United States diverting some 40 percent of its corn crop to fuel
while world grain prices soar.
Based on the just released Low Carbon Fuel Standard prepared by the University of California for the Governor, «regular» gasoline as a value of 85 — 92 g CO2 eq / MJ,
while natural gas has a value of ~ 80 g CO2 eq / MJ, electricity in California has an average value of 27 g CO2 eq / MJ (when used to drive an electric vehicle), and
cellulosic ethanol derived from municipal solid waste is ~ 5 g CO2 eq / MJ.
While ethanol, for example derived from corn but distilled in a facility powered by coal was, in fact, on average worse, than gasoline, some of the envisioned
cellulosic - based biofuels could be dramatically better on a g CO2 eq / MJ basis.
In contrast, a single planting of
cellulosic species will continue growing and producing for years
while trapping more carbon in the soil.
[3] Helioculture allows for brackish water or graywater, nonindustrial waste water from sources such as baths and washing machines, [4] to be used,
while traditional biofuels such as
cellulosic ethanol require fresh water.
The EPA is arguing that they took a reasonable look at capacity production and put out what they thought could be developed,
while the American Petroleum Institute is only looking at historic
cellulosic biofuel production.
Cellulosic biofuel plants are being built across the country,
while biofuels researchers and entrepreneurs are creating new oil - saving opportunities every day.
While Vogel acknowledges that it will be difficult to set up «large - scale field trials... particularly for an extended period of time in a large geographical area,» he believes the 540 % figure could be increased further with better land management and breeding techniques and with improvements in
cellulosic ethanol production technologies.
Cellulosic ethanol companies convert agricultural or forestry residues into ethanol,
while portable generators use similar feedstock, such as wood chips, to make electricity.