Biofuel Production in Developing Countries :: Sorghum and greenhouse gas balances

Fao / Ifad / Icrisat consultationRome, Italy8-9 November 2007

Jeff TschirleyEnvironment, Climate change and Bioenergy (Nrc)Interdepartmental working group on BioenergyFood & Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Where are the hungry?

Developed market economies

9Countries in transition

25

Sub-Saharan Africa

206

Near East and North Africa

38

Asia and Pacific

524

Latin America and

Caribbean52

854 million(820 in developing

countries)

212 million India 150 million China

Where is the energy deficit?

Why Sorghum?

Comparative advantage – food system, bioenergy system

Greenhouse gas benefits – methodologies under discussion, different systems under development

Life Cycle analysis – complex, time consuming

Ghg benefits alone may be insufficient to justify sorghum emphasis, also look for:

Complementary to other biofuel crops Multiple functions in production system

Righelato and Spracklen, 2007

:   

        

Cumulative avoided emissions per hectare over 30 years compared with carbon sequestered over 30 years by changing cropland to forest and loss of carbon to atmosphere by conversion of forest to cropland.

Error bars indicate values in literature cited.

Sequestration over many years

:   

        

Life Cycle Analysis central to all ghg balance estimates

Iso 14040 Life cycle assessment

International Energy Agency (IEA) Bioenergy Task 38 - Greenhouse Gas Balances of Biomass and Bioenergy Systems

Biomass-based climate change mitigation through renewable energy systems (Biomitre)

McClaren et al 2002

:   

0

50

100

150

200

250

Component

EthanolEthanol

K Btu/ bu grain

plantcultivate

fertilizerchemicals

irrigateharvest

transport

process

delivery DDGS credit

plantcultivate

fertilizerchemicals

irrigateharvest

transport

process

delivery DDGS credit

Net energy gain= 26,000 Btu/ buNet energy gain= 26,000 Btu/ bu

        

The Process Chain: Sorghum life cycle inputs

Ghg’s of interest: Carbon dioxide, CO2 Methane, CH4 ** Nitrous oxide, N2O **

Criteria: Simplicity Traceability Scientific credibility Political acceptability

Substitution approach: Products, co-products, wastes credits

subtracted from process chain Complex, time consuming, complete

Allocation approach: by mass by energy content * by market value Simpler, practical, some gaps

N.b. High probable error levels in estimates: Crutzen paper ca. three-fold increase in nitrogen component of ghg contribution over Ipcc 2007 estimate.

Data requirements: Net energy ratio Net energy requirement Net energy per hectare Net ghg emission factor

Unit energy credit Total energy credit Energy credit per hectare

Unit ghg credit Total ghg credit Ghg credit per hectare

System process components for biofuel production from rape oilseed

Biomitre, 2004

Spitzer, 2006

Greenhouse gas balances

Fuel FeedstockCurrently produced

GHG reduction v. petroleum

Production cost

Biofuels yield per hectare Land types

1st generation biofuels, commercially available

Ethanol

grains (wheat, maize)

US, Europe, China low-moderate moderate moderate cropland

Biodiesel (SVO, FAME)

oil seeds (rape, soy, sunflower) US, Europe low-moderate moderate low cropland

1st generation biofuels (commercially available in developing countries)

Ethanol sugar caneBrazil, India,

Thailand high low-moderate high croplands

Biodiesel/SVO palm oil Southeast Asia moderate low-moderatemoderate-

high coastal lands

Biogas (CNG)wastes, crops Europe, India high low-moderate high all land

2nd generation biofuels (not yet commercially available)

Ethanolcellulose, residues none high moderate-high* high

croplands, marginal lands

Biodiesel (BTL)cellulose residues none high moderate-high* high

croplands, marginal lands

Other

Biodiesel/SVO jatrophaSouth Asia,

Africa highmoderate-

high** low-moderate degraded lands

Biogas (SNG, GtL)biomass, residues all high moderate high all land

Fritsche, 2007

Some key challenges Favourable policy and legislative frameworks Estimating national bioenergy potentials Coordinating investment flows – industrial

bioenergy v.a.v. small-scale Best practices, certification - flexible, cost effective,

does not penalize small-scale producers Developing countries competing in international

markets and with technological change First versus second generation technologies

Some questions for sorghum potential Is sorghum already being grown? How does it

fit in the food scheme? Does biofuel processing infrastructure exist? Sorghum for export or domestic consumption? If export, can producers comply? Best

practices, certification If export, can the country compete? Regional

or global markets How fast do producers take up technology?

Thank you