Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Biofuel Life-Cycle Analysis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Bioenergy Economics and Policy: Volume II

Part of the book series: Natural Resource Management and Policy ((NRMP,volume 40))

Abstract

Life-cycle analysis (LCA) is an important tool used to assess the energy and environmental impacts of biofuels. Here, we review biofuel LCA methodology and its application in transportation fuel regulations in the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom. We examine the application of LCA to the production of ethanol from corn, sugarcane, corn stover, switchgrass, and miscanthus. A discussion of methodological choices such as co-product handling techniques in biofuel LCA is also provided. Further, we discuss the estimation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of land use changes (LUC) potentially caused by biofuels, which can significantly influence LCA results. Finally, we provide results from LCAs of ethanol from various sources. Regardless of feedstock, bioethanol offers reduced GHG emissions over fossil-derived gasoline, even when LUC GHG emissions are included. This is mainly caused by displacement of fossil carbon in gasoline with biogenic carbon in ethanol. Of the ethanol pathways examined, corn ethanol has the greatest life-cycle GHG emissions and offers 30% reduction in life-cycle GHG emissions as compared to gasoline when LUC GHG emissions are included. Miscanthus ethanol demonstrates the highest life-cycle GHG emissions reductions compared to gasoline, 109%, when LUC GHG emissions are included.

The submitted manuscript has been created by UChicago Argonne, LLC, Operator of Argonne National Laboratory (“Argonne”). Argonne, a U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science laboratory, is operated under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. The U.S. Government retains for itself, and others acting on its behalf, a paid-up nonexclusive, irrevocable worldwide license in said article to reproduce, prepare derivative works, distribute copies to the public, and perform publicly and display publicly, by or on behalf of the Government.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 179.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    N2O emissions for corn stover ethanol from supplemental fertilizer application are treated as net zero. N2O emissions from supplemental fertilizer applied to the field are assumed to be equal to N2O emissions that would have been emitted if the stover had been left on the field in a scenario without biofuel production because the N content of the removed stover and the supplemental fertilizer are equal.

  2. 2.

    Mostly based on Walter et al. (2013).

Abbreviations

Acronym:

Definition

AEZ:

Agro-ecological zone

BNDES:

Brazilian Development Bank

BLUM:

Brazilian land use model

CARB:

California Air Resources Board

CCLUB:

Carbon calculator for land use change from biofuels production

CGE:

Computable general equilibrium

CGEE:

Center for Global Environmental Education

CHP:

Combined heat and power

COLE:

Carbon online estimator

DOE:

Department of Energy

EC:

European Commission

EIO:

Economic input-output

EISA:

Energy Independence and Security Act

EPA:

Environmental Protection Agency

EU:

European Union

FAPRI-CARD:

Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute—Center for Agricultural and Rural Development

FASOM:

Forestry and agricultural sector optimization model

FQD:

Fuel quality directive

GHG:

Greenhouse gas

GREET:

Greenhouse gases, regulated emissions, and energy use in tranpsortation

GTAP:

Global trade analysis project

HWP:

Harvested wood product

ICONE:

Institute for international trade negotiations

IEA:

International energy agency

IFPRI:

International Food Policy Research Institute

IIASA:

International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis

iLUC:

Indirect land use change

IPCC:

Intergovernmental panel on climate change

LCA:

Life-cycle analysis

LCFS:

Low-carbon fuel standard

iLUC:

Land use change

NCASI:

National Council for Air and Stream Improvement

PE:

Partial equilibrium

PTW:

Pump-to-wheels

RED:

Renewable energy directive

RFS2:

Renewable fuel standard

RTFO:

Renewable transport fuels obligation

SOC:

Soil organic carbon

SOM:

Soil organic matter

SRWC:

Short rotation woody crops

UK:

United Kingdom

UNICA:

Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Association

USDA:

United States Department of Agriculture

WTP:

Well-to-pump

WTW:

Well-to-wheels

References

  • Andress, D. 2002. Soil carbon changes for bioenergy crops (report prepared for Argonne National Laboratory and U.S. Department of Energy). http://greet.es.anl.gov/publication-rfihxb2h. Accessed 22 Jan 2013.

  • Argonne National Laboratory. 2012. GREET model. http://greet.es.anl.gov/ (Accessed 06 Feb 2013).

  • Arora, S., Wu, M., and M. Wang. 2011. Update of distillers grains displacement ratios for corn ethanol life-cycle analysis. Argonne National Laboratory Report ANL/ESD/11-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • BioGrace Website. http://www.biograce.net/home. (Accessed 28 Jan 2013).

  • BNDES, CGEE. 2008. Sugarcane-based bioethanol: Energy for sustainable development, 304. Rio de Janeiro: BNDES.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boddey, R.M., Polidoro, J.C., Resende, A.S., Alves, B.J.R., and S. Urquiaga. 2001. Use of the 15 N natural abundance technique for the quantification of the contribution of N2 fixation to grasses and cereals. Australian Journal of Plant Physiology 28:889–895.

    Google Scholar 

  • British Standards Institute (BSI). 2011. PAS 2050: 2011 specification for the assessment of the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of goods and services. London: British Standards.

    Google Scholar 

  • California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2009a. Proposed regulation to implement the low carbon fuel standard volume I staff report: Initial statement of reasons. California Environmental Protection Agency, Air Resources Board. Release Date: 05 March 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • CARB. 2009b. Staff report: Detailed California-modified GREET pathway for Brazilian sugar cane ethanol, Version 2.2. Stationary Source Division. Release Date: 20 July 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • CARB. 2014. iLUC analysis for the low carbon fuel standard (Update). Presentation given at public workshop March 11, 2014. http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs_meetings/iluc_presentation_031014.pdf (Accessed 19 May 2014).

  • Carmo, J.B.D., S. Filoso, L.C. Zotelli, E.R. Sousa Neto, L.M. Pitombo, P.J. Duarte-Neto, V.P. Vargas, C.A. Andrade, G.J.C. Gava, R. Rossetto, H. Cantarella, A.E. Neto, and L.A. Martinelli. 2012. Infield greenhouse gas emissions from sugarcane soils in Brazil: effects from synthetic and organic fertilizer application and crop trash accumulation. GCB Bioenergy 5: 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnegie Mellon University Green Design Institute. Economic Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment (EIO-LCA). 2008. http://www.eiolca.net (Accessed 22 Jan 2013).

  • Cerri, C.C., M.V. Galdos, S.M.F. Maia, M. Bernoux, B.J. Feigl, D. Powlson, and C.E.P. Cerri. 2011. Effect of sugarcane harvesting systems on soil carbon stocks in Brazil: An examination of existing data. European Journal of Soil Science 62 (1): 23–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crutzen, P.J., A.R. Mosier, K.A. Smith, and W. Winiwarter. 2007. N2O release from agro-biofuel production negates global warming reduction by replacing fossil fuels. Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions 7 (4): 11191–11205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creutzig, F., A. Popp, P. Plevin, G. Luderer, J. Minx, and O. Edenhofer. 2012. Reconciling top-down and bottom-up modeling on future bioenergy deployment. Nature Climate Change 2: 320–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Figueiredo, E.B., and N. La Scala Jr. 2011. Greenhouse gas balance due to the conversion of sugarcane areas from burned to green harvest in Brazil. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment 141(1–2):77–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delucchi, M. 2003. A lifecycle emissions model (LEM): Lifecycle emissions from transportation fuels, motor vehicles, transportation modes, electricity use, heating and cooking fuels, and materials. Report UCD-ITS-RR-03-17. Davis, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department for Transport (DfT), UK. 2012. Renewable transport fuels obligation (RFFO). https://www.gov.uk/renewable-transport-fuels-obligation (Accessed 15 Dec 2012).

  • Djomo, S.N., and R. Cuelemans. 2012. A comparative analysis of the carbon intensity of biofuels caused by land use changes. GCB Bioenergy 4: 392–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drewer, J., J.W. Finch, C.R. Lloyd, E.M. Baggs, and U. Skiba. 2012. How do soil emissions of N2O, CH4, and CO2 from perennial bioenergy crops differ from arable annual crops? GCB Bioenergy 4: 408–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, J.B., S. Mueller, M. Wang, and J. Han. 2012. Energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions from enzyme and yeast manufacture for corn and cellulosic ethanol production. Biotechnology Letters 34: 2259–2263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, J.B., Mueller, S., Kwon, H., and M.Q. Wang. 2013. Land-use change and greenhouse gas emissions from corn and cellulosic ethanol. Biotechnology for Biofuels under review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutta, A., Talmadge, M., Hensley, J., Worley, M., Dudgeon, D., Barton, D., Groenendijk, P., Ferrari, D., Stears, B., Searcy, E.M., Wright, C.T., and Hess, J.R. 2011. Process for design and economics for conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol thermochemical pathway by indirect gasification and mixed alcohol synthesis. Report NREL/TP-5100-51400. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. http://www.nrel.gov/biomass/pdfs/51400.pdf.

  • Earles, J.M., and A. Halog. 2011. Consequential life cycle assessment: A review. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 16 (5): 445–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edwards, R., Mulligan, D., and L. Marelli. 2010. Indirect land use change from increased biofuels demand comparison of models and results from different feedstocks. Report for European Commission Joint Research Center. Ispra, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • European Comission (EC). 2009. Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/ 30/EC.

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. 2010. Commission decision of 10 June 2010 on guidelines for the calculation of land carbon stocks for the purpose of Annex V to Directive 2009/28/EC. Official Journal of the European Union, 17.6.2010, L151/19. (Notified under document C (2010) 3751) (2010/335/EU).

    Google Scholar 

  • EC. 2012. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 98/70/EC relating to the qulatiy of petrol and diesel fuels and amending Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. 2012/0288, Brussels, Belgium.

    Google Scholar 

  • FAPRI. 2011. Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute (FAPRI)/Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD). U.S.: Iowa State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fargione, J., Hill, J., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., and P. Hawthorne. 2008. Land cleaning and biofuel carbon debt. Science 319:1235–3.

    Google Scholar 

  • Georgescu, M., D.B. Lobell, and C.B. Field. 2011. Direct climate effects of perennial bioenergy crops in the United States. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108: 4307–4312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, H.K., A.S. Ruesch, F. Achard, M.K. Clayton, P. Holmgren, N. Ramankutty, and J.A. Foley. 2010. Tropical forests were the primary sources of new agricultural land in the 1980s and 1990s. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107: 16732–16737.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gold, S., and S. Seuring. 2011. Supply chain and logistics issues of bio-energy production. Journal of Cleaner Production 19: 32–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • GREET. 2011. Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREET) model. Argonne National Laboratory/U.S. Department of Energy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guretzky, J.A., Biermacher, J.T., Cook, B.J., Kering, M.K., and J. Mosali. 2010. Switchgrass for forage and bioenergy: Harvest and nitrogen rate effects on biomass yields and nutrient composition. Plant Soil doi:10.1007/s11104-010-0376-4.

  • Heath, L.S., Birdsey, R.A., Row, C., and A.J. Plantinga. 1996. Carbon pools and flux in U.S. forest products. In Forest Ecosystems, Forest Management, and the Global Carbon Cycle, eds. M.J. Apps and D.T. Price. NATO ASI Series I: Global Environmental Changes, vol. 40, p. 271–278, Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, J., S. Polasky, E. Nelson, D. Tilman, H. Huo, and L. Ludwig. 2009. Climate change and health costs of air emissions from biofuels and gasoline. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106: 2077–2082.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humbird, D., Davis, R., Tao, L., Kinchin, C., Hsu, D., Aden, A., Schoen, P., Lukas, J., Olthof, B., Worley, M., Sexton, D., and D. Dudgeon. 2011. Process design and economics for biochemical conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol dilute-acid pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis of corn stover. Report NREL/TP-5100-47764. Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/47764.pdf.

  • IEE. 2010. Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) Project BioGrace. Harmonised Calculations of Biofuel Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Europe.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Energy Agency (IEA). 2012. Energy Technology Perspective 2012: Pathways to a Clean Energy System. Paris, France.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khatiwada, D., J. Seabra, S. Silveira, and A. Walter. 2012. Accounting greenhouse gas emissions in the lifecycle of Brazilian sugarcane bioethanol: Methodological references in European and American regulations. Energy Policy 47: 384–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kløverpris, J.H., and S. Mueller. 2013. Baseline time accounting: Considering global land use dynamics when estimating the climate impacts of indirect land use change caused by biofuels. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 18: 319–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, H.Y., and R.J.M. Hudson. 2010. Quantifying management-driven changes in organic matter turnover in an agricultural soil: An inverse modeling approach using historical data and a surrogate CENTURY-type model. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 42: 2241–2253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, H., Wander, M., Mueller, S., and J.B. Dunn. 2013. Modeling state-level soil carbon emission factors under various scenarios for direct land use change associated with United States biofuel feedstock production. Biomass and Bioenergy under review.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laborde, D. 2011. Assessing the land use change consequences of European biofuel policies. Final Report, International Food Policy Research Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapola, D.M., R. Schaldach, J. Alcamo, A. Bondeau, J. Koch, C. Koelking, and J. Priess. 2010. Indirect land-use changes can overcome carbon savings from biofuels in Brazil. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107: 3388–3393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ludwig-Bölkow-Systemtechnik-GMBH (LBSM). 2012. E3 database. http://www.e3database.com/ (Accessed 6 Dec 2012).

  • Macedo, I.C. 1992. The sugar cane agro-industry and its contribution to reducing CO2 emissions in Brazil. Biomass and Bioenergy 3: 77–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Macedo, I.C. 1998. Greenhouse gas emissions and energy balances in bio-ethanol production and utilization in Brazil (1996). Biomass and Bioenergy 14: 77–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macedo, I.C. 2005. A energia da cana-de-açúcar – doze estudos sobre a agroindústria da cana-de-açúcar no Brasil e sua sustentabilidade. Editora Berlendis & Vertecchia, São Paulo 2005: 245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macedo, I.C., M.R.L.V. Leal, and J.E.A.R. Silva. 2004. Balanço das emissões de gases de efeito estufa na produção e no uso do etanol no Brasil. Governo de São Paulo: Secretaria do Meio Ambiente.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macedo, I.C., and J.E.A. Seabra. 2008. Mitigation of GHG emissions using sugarcane bioethanol. In Sugarcane ethanol: Contributions to climate change mitigation and the environment, ed. P. Zuurbier, and J. van de Vooren, 95–111. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Macedo, I.C., J.E.A. Seabra, and J.E.A.R. Silva. 2008. Green house gases emissions in the production and use of ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil: The 2005/2006 averages and a prediction for 2020. Biomass and Bioenergy 32: 582–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, S., Dunn, J.B., and M. Wang. 2012. Carbon calculator for land use change from biofuels production (CCLUB) users’ manual and technical documentation. 2012 ANL/ESD/12-5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassar, A.M., Antoniazzi, L.B., Moreira, M.R., Chiodi, L., and L. Harfuch. 2010. An allocation methodology to assess GHG emissions associated with land use change. Final Report, Institute for International Trade Negotiations (ICONE).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nogueira, L.A.H. 1987. Análise da utilização de energia na produção de álcool de cana-de-açúcar. PhD Thesis, Unicamp (1987).

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Hare, M., R.J. Plevin, J.I. Martin, A.D. Jones, A. Kendall, and E. Hopson. 2009. Proper accounting for time increases crop-based biofuels’ greenhouse gas deficit versus petroleum. Environmental Research Letters 4: 024001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oliveira, M.E.D., B.E. Vaughan, and E.J. Rykiel Jr. 2005. Ethanol as fuel: Energy, Carbon dioxide balances, and ecological footprint. Bioscience 55: 593–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parrish, D.J., and J.H. Fike. 2005. The biology and agronomy of switchgrass for biofuels. Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences 24: 423–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plevin, R.J., Gibbs, H.K., Duffy, J., Yui, S., and S. Yeh. 2014. Agro-ecological Zone Emission Factor (AEZ-EF) Model. http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lcfs_meetings/aezef-report.pdf (Accessed 14 May 2014).

  • Pielke, R.A., A. Pitman, D. Niyogi, R. Mahmood, C. McAlpine, F. Hossain, K.K. Goldewijk, U. Nair, R. Betts, S. Fall, M. Reichstein, P. Kabat, and N. de Noblet. 2011. Land use/land cover changes and climate: Modeling analysis and observational evidence. WIRE: Climate Change 2: 828–850.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pimentel, D., and T. Patzek. 2007. Ethanol production: energy and economic issues related to U.S. and Brazilian sugarcane. Natural Resource Research 16: 235–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popp, A., J.P. Dietrich, H. Lotze-Campen, D. Klein, N. Bauer, M. Krause, T. Beringer, D. Gerten, and O. Edenhofer. 2011. The economic potential of bioenergy for climate change mitigation with special attention given to implications for the land system. Environmental Research Letters 6: 034017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renewable Fuels Association (RFA). 2013. 2013 Ethanol Industry Outlook: Accelerating Industry Innovation. Washington, DC: Renewable Fuels Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarlat, N., and J.F. Dallemand. 2011. Recent developments of biofuels/bioenergy sustainability certification: a global review. Energy Policy 39: 1630–1646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scown, C.D., W.W. Nazaroff, U. Mishra, B. Strogen, A.B. Lobscheid, E. Masanet, N.J. Santero, A. Horvath, and T.E. McKone. 2012. Lifecycle greenhouse gas implications of U.S. national scenarios for cellulosic ethanol production. Environmental Research Letters 7: 014011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seabra, J.E.A., and I.C. Macedo. 2011. Comparative analysis for power generation and ethanol production from sugarcane residual biomass in Brazil. Energy Policy 39: 421–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seabra, J.E.A., I. Macedo, H.L. Chum, C.E. Faroni, and C.A. Sarto. 2011. Life cycle assessment of Brazilian Sugarcane products: GHG emissions and energy use. Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining 5: 519–532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Searchinger, T., R. Heimlich, R.A. Houghton, F. Dong, A. Elobeid, J. Fabiosa, S. Tokgoz, D. Hayes, and T.H. Yu. 2008. Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land use change. Science 319: 1238–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, J.G., G.E. Serra, J.R. Moreira, J.C. Gonçalves, and J. Goldemberg. 1978. Energy balance for ethyl alcohol production from crops. Science 201: 903–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Soares, L.H.B., Alves, B.J.R., Urquiaga, S., and R.M. Boddey. 2009. Mitigação das emissões de gases efeito estufa pelo uso de etanol da cana-de-açúcar produzido no Brasil. Circular Técnica 27, Embrapa. Seropédica, RJ.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taheripour, F., Tyner, W.E., and M.Q. Wang. 2011. Global land use changes due to the U.S. cellulosic biofuel program simulated with the GTAP model. http://greet.es.anl.gov/publication-luc_ethanol (Accessed 14 Aug 2012).

  • Timilsina, G.R., and A. Shrestha. 2011. How much hope should we have for biofuels? Energy 36: 2055–2069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brazilian Sugarcane Association (UNICA). 2009. Letter to California Air Resource Board about proposed Low Carbon Fuel Standard, Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Association (UNICA). 16 April 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNICA. 2013. UNICA Data Center 2013 (available at http://www.unicadata.com.br/index.php?idioma=2 (Accessed 14 May 2014).

  • U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2010. Quick Stats 2.0 2010 http://www.nass.usda.gov/Data_and_Statistics/Pre-Defined_Queries/2010_Corn_Upland_Cotton_Fall_Potatoes/index.asp (Accessed 04 Jan 2013).

  • U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 2011a. Report on the First Quadrennial Technology Review. Washington, D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 2011b. US Billion-Ton Update: Biomass Supply for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry. Oak Ridge National Laboratory for DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Biomass Office: Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2010. United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2), Regulatory Impact Analysis. Assessment and Standards Division, Office of Transport and Air Quality U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-420-R-10-006, Feb 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Deusen, P.C., and L.S. Heath. 2010. Weighted analysis methods for mapped plot forest inventory data: Tables, regressions, maps and graphs. Forest Ecology and Management 260: 1607–1612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walter, A., Galdos, M.V., Scarpare, F.V., Leal, M.R.L.V., Seabra, J.E.A., Cunha, M.P., Picoli, M.C.A., and C.O.F. Oliveira. 2013. Brazilian sugarcane ethanol: Developments so far and challenges for the future. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., M. Wu, H. Huo, and J. Liu. 2008. Life-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas emission implications of Brazilian sugarcane ethanol simulated with the GREET model. International Sugar Journal 110: 527–545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., H. Huo, and S. Arora. 2011a. Methodologies of dealing with co-products of biofuels in life-cycle analysis and consequent results within the U.S. context. Energy Policy 539: 5726–5736.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M.Q., J. Han, Z. Haq, W.E. Tyner, M. Wu, and A. Elgowainy. 2011b. Energy and greenhouse gas emission effects of corn and cellulosic ethanol with technology improvements. Biomass and Bioenergy 35: 1885–1896.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, M., J. Han, J.B. Dunn, H. Cai, and A. Elgowainy. 2012. Well-to-wheels energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of ethanol from corn, sugarcane and cellulosic biomass for US use. Environmental Research Letters 7: 045905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zilberman, D., G. Barrows, G. Hochman, and D. Rajagopal. 2013. On the indirect effect of biofuel. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 95: 1332–1347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Basic Energy Sciences, Office of Science, under contract # DE-AC02-06CH11357.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL, 60439, USA

    Jennifer B. Dunn, Jeongwoo Han & Michael Wang

  2. UNICAMP, Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil

    Joaquim Seabra

Authors
  1. Jennifer B. Dunn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeongwoo Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joaquim Seabra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer B. Dunn .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Illinois, USA

    Madhu Khanna

  2. Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, California, USA

    David Zilberman

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Dunn, J.B., Han, J., Seabra, J., Wang, M. (2017). Biofuel Life-Cycle Analysis. In: Khanna, M., Zilberman, D. (eds) Handbook of Bioenergy Economics and Policy: Volume II. Natural Resource Management and Policy, vol 40. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-6906-7_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation