No benefit to biofuel, finds study

Farmers, businesses and the state are investing millions of dollars in ethanol and biofuel plants as renewable energy sources, but a new study says the alternative fuels burn more energy than they produce.

Supporters of ethanol and other biofuels contend they burn cleaner than fossil fuels, reduce US dependence on oil and give farmers another market for their produce.

But researchers at Cornell University and the University of California-Berkeley say it takes 29% more fossil energy to turn corn into ethanol than the amount of fuel the process produces.

For switch grass it takes 45% more energy and for wood, 57%, 27% for soybeans into biodiesel fuel and more than double the energy produced is needed to do the same to sunflower plants, the study found.

“Ethanol production in the United States does not benefit the nation’s energy security, its agriculture, the economy or the environment,” according to the study by Cornell’s David Pimentel and Berkeley’s Tad Patzek. They conclude the country would be better off investing in solar, wind and hydrogen energy.

About 3.6 billion gallons of ethanol were produced last year in the US, according to the Renewable Fuels Association.

The ethanol industry claims that using 8 billion gallons of ethanol a year will allow refiners to use 2 billion fewer barrels of oil. The oil industry disputes that, saying the ethanol mandate would have negligible impact on oil imports.

Ethanol producers dispute Pimentel and Patzek’s findings, saying the data is outdated and doesn’t take into account profits that offset costs.