Post on 01-Jun-2020
Land Use Trade-offs between Fuel, Food and Ecosystem Services in Florida
Michal Fidler1, John C. Capece1, Edward A. Hanlon2 and Kamal Alsharif3
1 Intelligentsia International, Inc., LaBelle, FL 2 University of Florida - IFAS, Southwest Florida Research and Education Center, Immokalee, FL 3 Department of Geography, Environment, and Planning, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL
Federal Agency & Organization: Department of Energy – Office of the Biomass Program
Project Title: Hendry County Sustainable Biofuels Center
Award Number: EE0000303
Recipient Organization: Hendry County, Florida
Objectives of the study
Document land use implications of biomass production to demonstrate the overall resources implications associated with bioethanol production for Florida’s transportation sector needs.
Outline of the Presentation
Biofuels – rationale, categorization, production (biomass,
bioethanol), advantages and challenges
Land use changes – overview, relationships, land availability
Florida case study
Bioethanol production
Bioethanol needs (transportation sector)
Bioethanol land requirements
Bioethanol trade-offs
Conclusions
Why biofuels? Rationale for using BF:
Limited fossil fuels
Energy security issues (oil’s dependency)
Increasing industrialization
GHG mitigation
Waste utilization
Help to ag industry
Carbon sequestration
Potential for being sustainable among the “alternate energy” sources
Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA)
Biofuels categorization
Primary:
unprocessed biomass
Secondary:
processed biomass
G1 - food crops (corn, soybeans), sugars and oils biomass
G2 - non-food crops and lignocellulosic wastes (energycane, eucalyptus), lignocellulosic biomass
G3 - micro- and macro-algae (Sargassum/Seaweed, Euglena), algal biomass
Secondary BF - 3 generations:
Bioethanol
• Most important biofuel
• Colorless liquid
• Replacement for fossil gas, blended at rates 10-85% (E10 – E85)
• Improves combustion
• Lowers emissions of CO
Advantages and challenges of BF
• Categories – social, economic, ecologic, technical
• “Overlap” – complexity of the issues, they are never separate
• Weight the issues properly – an improvement on issue A can be less important than a deterioration on issue B
Land use changes (LUC) Land Use Change (LUC) is a term covering two distinct (direct, indirect) means by which land can be altered in the pursuit (in this specific case) of biofuels production.
Direct LUC (dLUC) occurs when land previously used for other purposes is converted to biofuel crops production.
Indirect LUC (iLUC) refers to the changes in land use that take place elsewhere as a consequence of a bioenergy project.
Effects: iLUC > dLUC
Effects still learned about
Land use changes in FL - overview Until the end of 19th century: more or less natural state
Beginning of the 20th century till today: extensive residential, commercial and ag. development
1936 – 1995:
Increase: Population: 829%, Cropland, pastures: 59%, Urban land: 628%
Decrease: Forest land: -22%, Marsh land: -51%
Source: Marshall, 2004.
Land use changes in FL - consequences • Large farms driven only by profit
• Loss of biological diversity
• Land development regulations political battles
• Regional & Global climate changes
• Land management
• Water management
Land use availability
Globally Florida
Population 7.1 B 19 M
ALL land 148,940k km² 170k km²
AG land/person 1.71 ac/p 0.43 ac/p ARABLE land/person 0.52 ac/p 0.16 ac/p
PASTURES land/person 1.19 ac/p 0.27 ac/p
Land is a VERY limited resource
References:
FAOSTAT, 2011; Florida Department of Transportation, 2012; United States Department of Agriculture, 2007.
Why BF in Florida? Favorable subtropical to tropical climate
Abundant, though limited water resources
Advanced research
Traditional leading ag. role
Minor oil reserves, no refineries
Increasing energy demands
Bioethanol production – FL case
• 500k+ acres used for potential BF crops • Currently no large scale bioethanol facilities • Cellulosic bioethanol (G2) a possible way forward?
Hendry County Sustainable Biofuels Research Center • Analytical Tools Development • Life Cycle Analysis • Cost-Benefit Analysis • Sustainable Farming Systems • Ecosystem Services Compensation • Economic Development • Youth Development
FL BF production - crops
8 various bioethanol crops considered:
Miscanthus
Switchgrass
Sweet Sorghum
Corn
Elephantgrass
Sugarcane
Energycane
Eucalyptus
FL BF crops – biomass yields (ton/ac)
Medium yield
(ton/ac)
Miscanthus 6.0
Switchgrass 3.6
Sorghum 11.5
Corn 4.2
Elephantgrass 14.4
Sugarcane 7.4
Energycane 22.5 Eucalyptus 13.7
0
5
10
15
20
25
References: Erickson, 2012; Newman, 2011; Rahmani, 2009; Woodard, 2012; Rainbolt, 2010; Hinchee, 2011; Stricker, 2000.
FL BF crops – bioethanol yields (gal/ac)
Medium yield
(gal/ac)
Miscanthus 300
Switchgrass 288
Sorghum 310
Corn 405
Elephantgrass N/A
Sugarcane 683
Energycane 1125 Eucalyptus 1109
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
References: Rainbolt, 2010; Helsel, 2011; Rahmani, 2009; Vermerris, 2011; Woodard, 2012; Shapouri, 2006; Gonzalez, 2011.
FL transportation - bioethanol needs
𝐴𝑛𝑛𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝐿 = 191,854,954,745 miles
14,372,807 vehicles= 𝟏𝟑, 𝟑𝟒𝟖
𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐬
𝐯𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 (𝐸10) 𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝐿 = 191,854,954,745 miles
8,152,702,000 gal E10= 𝟐𝟑. 𝟓
𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐬
𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝑬𝟏𝟎
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝐸10 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝐿 = 13,348
𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑠𝑣𝑒ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 / 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
23.5𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑒𝑠
𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝐸10
= 𝟓𝟔𝟕 𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝑬𝟏𝟎
𝐯𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 / 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫
Reference: Florida Department of Transportation, 2012.
FL - bioethanol needs (cont.)
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝐸100 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝐿 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑣𝑒ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 = 567 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝐸10
𝑣ℎ𝑙 / 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟+ 31% ∗ 567
𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝐸10
𝑣ℎ𝑙 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟
= 𝟕𝟒𝟑 𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐭
𝐯𝐡𝐥 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫
𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑒ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒𝑠 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝐿 =14,372,807 𝑣ℎ𝑙
18,905,048 𝑝𝑒𝑜𝑝𝑙𝑒= 𝟎. 𝟕𝟔
𝐯𝐡𝐥
𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝐸100 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝐿 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛 = 743 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝐸100
𝑣ℎ𝑙 𝑦𝑒𝑎𝑟∗ 0.76
𝑣ℎ𝑙
𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛
= 𝟓𝟔𝟓 𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫
Reference: Florida Department of Transportation, 2012.
FL – bioethanol needs (gal/person/year)
Fossil fuel Ethanol Total fuel
E0 416.4 0.0 416.4
E10 388.1 43.1 431.2
E15 372.9 65.8 438.7
E20 356.9 89.2 446.1
E85 81.4 461.4 542.8
E100 0.0 565.1 565.1
Absolute numbers for all Floridians:
E10 – 815 M gal of ethanol/year E100 – 10.7 B gal of ethanol/year
FL - bioethanol land requirements
𝐹𝑢𝑒𝑙 𝐸100 𝑛𝑒𝑒𝑑𝑠 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝐿 𝑝𝑒𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛 = 𝟓𝟔𝟓𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝟏𝟎𝟎
𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫
𝐸𝑡ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑙 𝑦𝑖𝑒𝑙𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝐹𝐿 = 𝒙 𝐠𝐚𝐥 𝐄𝐭
𝐚𝐜𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫
𝐸100, 𝐿𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑆𝑢𝑔𝑎𝑟𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑒 =565 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝐸100
𝑦𝑟 𝑝𝑒𝑟
683 𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝐸𝑡𝑎𝑐𝑟𝑒 𝑦𝑟
= 𝟎. 𝟖𝟑𝒂𝒄𝒓𝒆
𝒚𝒆𝒂𝒓 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒐𝒏
Land use requirements (ac/person) for E100
Medium yield
(ac/person)
Miscanthus 1.88
Switchgrass 1.96
Sorghum 1.82
Corn 1.40
Elephantgrass N/A
Sugarcane 0.83
Energycane 0.50 Eucalyptus 0.51
Availability: 0.43 ac ag. land/person, 0.16 ac arable land/person
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
Ag land (% use) - land use trade-offs for BF
E10 10% of Eth
from FL
E10 20% of Eth
from FL
E10 25% of Eth
from FL
E10 100% of Eth
from FL
Miscanthus 3% 7% 8% 34%
Switchgrass 4% 7% 9% 35%
Sorghum 3% 7% 8% 33%
Corn 2% 5% 6% 25%
Elephantgrass N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sugarcane 1% 3% 4% 15%
Energycane 1% 2% 2% 9%
Eucalyptus 1% 2% 2% 9%
Ag land (% use) - land use trade-offs for BF
E10 E15 E20 E85
Miscanthus 34% 51% 70% 361%
Switchgrass 35% 54% 73% 376%
Sorghum 33% 50% 68% 349%
Corn 25% 38% 52% 267%
Elephantgrass N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sugarcane 15% 23% 31% 159%
Energycane 9% 14% 19% 96%
Eucalyptus 9% 14% 19% 98%
FL Ag Land
Switchgrass Miscanthus
Sorghum
Corn
Sugarcane
Eucalyptus
Energycane
0%
100%
200%
300%
400%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
FL FarmlandSwitchgrassMiscanthusSorghumCornSugarcaneEucalyptusEnergycane
Bioethanol in Florida Vehicular Fuels
Florida Ag Land Demand for E15 to E85 Fl
ori
da
Ag
Lan
d R
eq
uir
em
en
t
Conclusions
• Land use requirement for production of all ethanol in E85 in Florida is roughly the same as the total available Ag land in Florida for the best yielding biofuels crops (energycane, eucalyptus).
• Vehicular energy is only 33% of Floridians energy consumption - so even if we give up ALL our ag land for biofuels, we still produce only 33% of FL total energy needs.
Conclusions • Bioethanol (primarily cellulosic) produced in
Florida has a potential to meet a significant portion of the State’s transportation needs.
• Various issues need to be addressed: technology and infrastructure negative effects on biodiversity cost of water climate changes land use changes trade-offs for limited available land
Conclusions
• Globally, a one-for-one trade off is estimated between fuel, food, and ecosystems services.
• Assuming no change in food production and consumption habits in Florida, the likely result of biofuels sector expansion would be the conversion of natural lands or low-intensity agricultural lands into high-intensity biomass production.
FL Ag Land
Switchgrass Miscanthus
Sorghum
Corn
Sugarcane
Eucalyptus
Energycane
0%
100%
200%
300%
400%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
FL FarmlandSwitchgrassMiscanthusSorghumCornSugarcaneEucalyptusEnergycane
Bioethanol in Florida Vehicular Fuels
Florida Ag Land Demand for E15 to E85 Fl
ori
da
Ag
Lan
d R
eq
uir
em
en
t
References • Marshall, C. H., Pielke, R. A., Steyaert, L. T., & Willard, D. A. (2004). The Impact of Anthropogenic
Land-Cover Change on the Florida Peninsula Sea Breezes and Warm Season Sensible Weather. Monthly Weather Review, 132(1), 28–52.
• Erickson, J., Rainbolt, C., Newman, Y., Sollenberger, L., & Helsel, Z. (2012). Production of Miscanthus x giganteus for Biofuel 1. IFAS, (SS-AGR-292).
• Newman, Y., Williams, M. J., Helsel, Z. R., & Vendramini, J. (2011). Production of Biofuel Crops in Florida : Switchgrass. Electronic Data Information Source (EDIS), Soil and Water Science Department, University of Florida, (SS AGR 291), 1–4.
• Rahmani, M., & Hodges, A. (2009). Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida. Electronic Data Information Source (EDIS), Soil and Water Science Department, University of Florida, (FE650), 1–9.
• Woodard, K. R., & Sollenberger, L. E. (2012). Production of Biofuel Crops in Florida: Elephantgrass. Electronic Data Information Source (EDIS), Soil and Water Science Department, University of Florida, (SS-AGR-297), 1–3.
• Rainbolt, C. (2010). Production of Biofuel Crops in Florida: Sugarcane/Energycane. Crops, (SS AGR 298), 2–5.
• Hinchee, M., Rottmann, W., & Mullinax, L. (2011). Short-rotation woody crops for bioenergy and biofuels applications. Biofuels, 45(6), 619–629.
• Stricker, James A., Rockwood, D. L., Segrest, S. A., Alker, G. R., Prine, G. M., & Carter, D. R. (2000). Short rotation woody crops for Florida. 3rd Biennial Short Rotation Woody Crops Operations Working Group Conference (pp. 36087–36096). New York.
• Helsel, Z. R., & Álvarez, J. (2011). Economic Potential of Switchgrass as a Biofuel Crop in Florida. Managing, (FE900), 1–7.
References (cont.) • Vermerris, W., Erickson, J., Wright, D., Newman, Y., & Rainbolt, C. (2011). Production of Biofuel
Crops in Florida : Sweet Sorghum. Electronic Data Information Source (EDIS), Soil and Water Science Department, University of Florida, (SS-AGR-293), 1–3.
• Shapouri, H., & Michael E. Salassi. (2006). The economic feasibility of ethanol production from sugar in the United States (pp. 1–78). Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
• Gonzalez R., Treasure T., Phillips R., Jameel H., Saloni D., Abt R., Wright, J. (2011). Converting Eucalyptus biomass into ethanol: Financial and sensitivity analysis in a co-current dilute acid process. Part II. Biomass and Bioenergy 2011;35(2):767-772.
• FAOSTAT. (2011). The Statistics Division of the FAO. • Florida Department of Transportation. (2012). Florida Population Estimate. Florida Statistical
Abstract. • United States Department of Agriculture. (2007). National Agricultural Statistics Service. • Florida Department of Transportation. (2012). Florida Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled on Public
Roads. Florida Highway Data Source Book. • Florida Department of Transportation. (2012). Total Florida Registered Vehicles. Florida Highway
Data Source Book. • Florida Department of Transportation. (2012). Florida Annual Vehicle Miles Traveled on Public
Roads. Florida Highway Data Source Book. • Florida Department of Transportation. (2012). Florida Monthly Reported Gasoline Sales. Highway
Statistics Series. • Florida Department of Transportation. (2012). Florida Population Estimate. Florida Statistical
Abstract.