Ethonal brazil

Biofuels have gained important place on the world stage, due to their sustainability and the fast depletion rate of fossil fuels. Brazil is the second largest ethanol producer (23.6 billion liters in 2012/2013) in the world by alcoholic fermentation directly from the juice or from the molasses obtained in sugar production facilities. During the extraction of sugarcane juice from the stem, sugarcane bagasse (SB) is generated in high amount. According to the Brazilian National Supply Company (CONAB), the sugarcane production correspondent to the 2013/2014 harvest year is about 652 millions of metric tons. These values are correspondent to about 174 millions of metric tons of SB, considering the proportion indicated by Procknor. Around 75–90% of the SB is used in heat and electricity generation in sugarcane processing industries. Remaining SB may serve as an excellent raw material for second generation (2G) ethanol production due to the presence of high amount of carbohydrates such as glucose and xylose. In first generation ethanol production technology, Saccharomyces cerevisiae is the most widely used microorganism for the fermentation of sucrose available in the juice or molasses into ethanol. This yeast can also be used for 2G ethanol production from glucose solution obtained by pretreatment of cellulosic fraction of SB. For the economic ethanol production from SB, it is equally important to consider hemicellulosic fraction along with cellulosic part of cell wall. Hemicellulose represents about one-third of the carbohydrate fraction available in SB. This macromolecular fraction is rich in pentose residues, mainly xylose, which are not fermented by native S. cerevisiae. However, there are some microorganisms able to ferment xylose to ethanol or other products. The use of xylose metabolizing microorganism will increase in the global yield of ethanol in sugarcane based biorefineries. Dilute acid hydrolysis is an efficient process for the hemicellulose depolymerization into variety of priority pentose sugars such as arabinose and mainly xylose. The remaining solid fraction is known as cellulignin which can be hydrolysed into glucose from the cellulose fraction by cellulase enzymes. Hemicellulose depolymerization by dilute acid hydrolysis yields primarily xylose and other sugar monomers, although some other byproducts considering inhibitors to microbial metabolism, such as furans, 5-hydroxymethylfurfurals, phenolics, and weak acids. Therefore, it is necessary to reduce the concentration of these inhibitors prior to using the hemicellulosic hydrolysate into ethanol via microbial fermentation. Calcium oxide mediated neutralization of hydrolysate followed by activated charcoal treatment efficiently removes the inhibitors. For the production of hemicellulosic ethanol, Scheffersomyces shehatae (Syn. Candida shehatae) has been considered a promising microorganism which provides high ethanol productivities. However, a balanced nutrient supplementation is required for the optimal growth of S. shehatae for the production of ethanol with desired yield and productivities. In this work, ethanol production from sugarcane bagasse hemicellulosic hydrolysate was evaluated, using the yeast S. shehatae UFMG-HM 52.2 in different fermentation medium. Materials and Methods Lignocellulosic biomass Sugar cane bagasse procured from Shakar Gunj Sugar mills (Pvt.) Limited, Jhang Road, Faisalabad, Pakistan, and wheat straw and rice straw were purchased from a local market of Lahore city was used as a source of lignocellulosic biomass. The biomass was washed and dried to remove the unwanted particles and then milled into powder form (2 mm) with hammer beater mill. Microorganism Sacchromyces cervisae was obtained from microbiology laboratory, Food and Biotechnology Research Center (FBRC), PCSIR and maintained on PDA slants stored at 4 °C for further use. Pretreatment of biomasses Sugar cane bagasse and wheat straw samples were pretreated by method as reported earlier (Irfan et al., 2011a). The chopped sugar cane bagasse and wheat straw samples were soaked in 3% H2O2 + 2% NaOH solution at the ratio of 1: 10 (solid : liquid) for 2 h at room temperature. After that samples were steamed at 130 °C for 60 min. After steaming the samples were filtered and solid residues were washed up to neutrality. Determination of lignin The lignin content in treated and untreated samples was measured being considered as lignin the remaining solid residue after hydrolysis with 1.25% H2SO4 for two hours and 72% H2SO4 hydrolysis for four hours. The residue was filtered and washed with distilled water to remove sulphuric acid and oven dried at 105 °C for constant weight. The lignin (%) and delignification (%) was expressed by using the following equations (Irfan et al., 2011a): where Lu = Lignin (untreated sample), and Lt = Lignin (treated sample). Enzymatic hydrolysis Enzymatic hydrolysis was done as described earlier (Irfan et al., 2011a). Commercial enzyme with CMCase activity of 2900 IU/mL and filter paper activity of 1500 FPU/mL enzyme solution was used for the hydrolysis experiments. Pretreated substrates at 5% solids loading (grams dry weight per 100 mL) in distilled water were incubated in flasks in a shaking water bath at 50 °C and 140 rpm for 8 h. After termination of enzymatic hydrolysis the material was centrifuged at 10,000 rpm for 10 min. The supernatant was removed for sugar content analysis. Saccharification (%) was calculated as described by Uma et al. (2010). Ethanol production The medium used for ethanol fermentation composed of (%) 0.25 (NH4)2SO4, 0.1 KH2PO4, 0.05 MgSO4, 0.25 Yeast extract; These chemicals were added to the filtrate from saccharified biomasses (Bagasse, rice straw, wheat straw) and sterilized at 121 °C for 15 min. After sterilization the medium was allowed to cool at room temperature. After that one milliliter suspension of Sacchromyces cervisea were inoculated and incubated anaerobically at 30 °C for four days of fermentation period. After termination of the fermentation period, ethanol produced was estimated and the ethanol yield was calculated by using following formula as described in Yoswathana and Phuriphipat (2010). *Theoratical ethanol = amount of initial sugar content (g) in fermentation solution x 0.5 Estimation of ethanol The ethanol content was measured spectrophotometrically as described by Caputi et al. (1968). One milliliter of the fermented sample was taken in 500 mL Pyrex distillation flask containing 30 mL of distilled water. The distillate was collected in 50 mL flask containing 25 mL of potassium dichromate solution About 20 mL of distillate was collected in each sample and the flasks were kept in a water bath maintained at 60 °C for 20 min. The flasks were cooled to room temperature and the volume raised to 50 mL. Five mL of this was diluted with 5 mL of distilled water for measuring the optical density at 600 nm using a spectrophotometer. Estimation of sugars Reducing sugars were estimated by the method of Miller (1959) and total sugars were measured by the method as described by Duboise et al. (1956). Fourier transform infra red spectroscopy of substrates FTIR was used to check the chemical changes in treated and untreated samples as described earlier (Irfan et al., 2011b). Mixture of sample and KBr (5% sample : 95% KBr) were passed into a disk for Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy measurement. The spectrum was recorded with 32 scans in the frequency range of 4000-400 cm-1 with a resolution of 4 cm-1. Statistical analysis Statistical analysis was done by ANOVA test using Microsoft Excel program. The difference in values was indicated in the form of probability (p < 0.05) values. History Brazil produced 666.8 million tons of sugarcane, which yielded 33.8 million tons of sugar and 30.2 billion litres (8 billion gallons) of ethanol. That makes Brazil the world's largest sugar producer and second largest ethanol producer, behind the United States. The history of ethanol fuel in Brazil dates from the 1970s and relates to Brazil’s sugarcane -based ethanol fuel program, which allowed the country to become the world's second largest producer of ethanol, and the world's largest exporter.[1] Several important political and technological developments led Brazil to become the world leader in the sustainable use of bioethanol, ,and Africa. Government policies and technological advances also allowed t and a policy model for other developing countries in the tropical zone of Latin America, the Caribbeanhe country to achieve a landmark in ethanol consumption, when ethanol retail sales surpassed 50% market share of the gasolinepowered vehicle fleet in early 2008.[9][10] This level of ethanol fuel consumption had only been reached in Brazil once before, at the peak of the Pró-Álcool Program near the end of the 1980s. How ethanol is produced from sugarcane? Sugarcane ethanol is an alcohol-based fuel produced by the fermentation of sugarcane juice and molasses. Because it is a clean, affordable and low-carbon biofuel, sugarcane ethanol has emerged as a leading renewable fuel for the transportation sector. How ethanol fuel is made? Ethanol is produced from biomass mostly via a fermentation process using glucose derived from sugars (sugar cane, sugar beet and molasses), starch (corn, wheat, grains) or cellulose (forest products) as raw materials. In this form, it is renewable Early stage Sugarcane has been cultivated in Brazil since 1532. Introduced in Pernambuco that year, sugar was one of the first commodities exported to Europe by the Portuguese settlers. Ethyl alcohol or ethanol is obtained as a by-product of sugar mills producing sugar, and can be processed to produce alcoholic beverages, ethanol fuel or alcohol for industrial or antiseptic uses. The first use of sugarcane ethanol as fuel in Brazil dates back to the late twenties and early thirties of the 20th century, with the introduction of the automobile in the country. After World War I some experimenting took place in Brazil's Northeast Region, and as early as 1919, the Governor of Pernambuco mandated all official vehicles to run on ethanol. The first ethanol fuel production plant went on line in 1927, the Usina Serra Grande Alagoas (USGA), located in the Northeastern state of Alagoas, producing fuel with 75% ethanol and 25% ethyl ether. As other plants began producing ethanol fuel, two years later there were 500 cars running on this fuel in the country's Northeast Region. A decree was issued on February 20, 1931, mandating the blend of 5% hydrated ethanol to all imports of gasoline by volume. The number of distilleries producing ethanol fuel went from 1 in 1933 to 54 by 1945. Fuel-grade ethanol production increased from 100,000 liters in 1933 to 51.5 million liters in 1937, representing 7% of the country's fuel consumption. Production peaked to 77 million liters during World War II, representing 9.4% of all ethanol production in the country. Due to German submarine attacks threatening oil supplies, the mandatory blend was as high as 50 percent in 1943. After the end of the war cheap oil caused gasoline to prevail, and ethanol blends were only used sporadically, mostly to take advantage of sugar surpluses, until the 1970s, when the first oil crisis resulted in gasoline shortages and awareness on the dangers of oil dependence. Pro-alcohol era As a response to the 1973 oil crisis, the Brazilian government began promoting bioethanol as a fuel. The National Alcohol Program -Pró-Álcool- (Portuguese: Programa Nacional do Álcool), launched in 1975, was a nationwide program financed by the government to phase out automobile fuels derived from fossil fuels, such as gasoline, in favor of ethanol produced from sugar cane. The decision to produce ethanol from sugarcane was based on the low cost of sugar at the time, the idle capacity for distillation at the sugar plants, and the country's tradition and experience with this feedstock. Other sources of fermentable carbohydrates were also explored such as manioc and other feedstocks. The first phase of the program concentrated in production of anhydrous ethanol for blending with gasoline. After testing in government fleets with several prototypes developed by local subsidiaries of Fiat, Volkswagen, GM, and Ford, and compelled by the second oil crisis, the first 16 gasoline stations began supplying hydrous ethanol in May 1979 for a fleet of 2,000 neat ethanol adapted vehicles, and by July, the Fiat 147 was launched to the market, becoming the first modern commercial neat ethanol-powered car (E100) sold in the world. Brazilian carmakers modified gasoline engines to support hydrous ethanol characteristics. Changes included compression ratio, amount of fuel injected, replacement of materials subject to corrosion by ethanol, use of colder spark plugs suitable for dissipating heat due to higher flame temperatures, and an auxiliary cold-start system that injects gasoline from a small tank to aid cold starting. Six years later, approximately 75% of Brazilian passenger cars were manufactured with ethanol engines. The Brazilian government also made mandatory the blend of ethanol fuel with gasoline, fluctuating from 1976 until 1992 between 10% and 22%. Due to this mandatory minimum gasoline blend, pure gasoline (E0) is no longer sold in the country. A federal law was passed in October 1993 establishing a mandatory blend of 22% anhydrous ethanol (E22) in the entire country. This law also authorized the Executive to set different percentages of ethanol within pre-established boundaries; since 2003 these limits were fixed at a maximum of 25% (E25) and a minimum of 20% (E20) by volume. Since then, the government has set the percentage on the ethanol blend according to the results of the sugarcane harvest and the levels of ethanol production from sugarcane, resulting in blend variations even within the same year. Since July 2007 the mandatory blend was 25% of anhydrous ethanol and 75% gasoline or E25 blend. As a result of supply shortages and high ethanol fuel prices, in 2010 the government mandated a temporary 90-day blend reduction from E25 to E20 beginning February 1, 2010. As supply shortages took place again between the 2010-2011 harvest seasons, some ethanol was imported from the US, and in April 2011 the government reduced the minimum mandatory blend to 18 percent, leaving the mandatory blend range between E18 to E25. By mid March 2015 the government raised the ethanol blend in regular gasoline from 25% to 27%. The blend on premium gasoline was kept at 25% upon request by ANFAVEA, the Brazilian association of automakers, because of concerns about the effects on the higher blend on cars that were built only for E25 as the maximum blend, as opposed to flex-fuel cars. The government approved the higher blend as an economic incentive for ethanol producers, due to an existing overstock of over 1 billion liters (264 million US gallons) of ethanol. The implementation of E27 is expected to allow the consumption of the overstock before the end of 2015. The Brazilian government provided three important initial motivators for the ethanol industry: guaranteed purchases by the state-owned oil company Petrobras, low-interest loans for agroindustrial ethanol firms, and fixed gasoline and ethanol prices where hydrous ethanol sold for 59% of the government-set gasoline price at the pump. These incentives made ethanol production competitive. After reaching more than 4 million cars and light trucks running on pure ethanol by the late 1980s, representing 33% of the country's motor vehicle fleet, ethanol production and sales of neat ethanol cars tumbled due to several factors. First, gasoline prices fell sharply as a result of the 1980s oil glut. The inflation adjusted real 2004 dollar value of oil fell from an average of US$78.2 in 1981 to an average of US$26.8 per barrel in 1986. Also, by mid-1989 a shortage of ethanol fuel supply in the local market left thousands of vehicles in line at gas stations or out of fuel in their garages. At the time ethanol production was tightly regulated by the government, as well as pricing of both gasoline and ethanol fuel, the latter subject to fixed producer prices. As a complement, the government provided subsidies to guarantee a lower ethanol price at the pump as compared to gasoline, as consumers were promised that ethanol prices would never be higher than 65% the price of gasoline. As sugar prices sharply increased in the international market by the end of 1988 and the government did not set the sugar export quotas, production shifted heavily towards sugar production causing an ethanol supply shortage, as the real cost of ethanol was around US$45 per barrel. As ethanol production stagnated at 12 billion liters and could not keep pace with the increasing demand required by the now significant ethanol-only fleet, the Brazilian government began importing ethanol from Europe and Africa in 1991. Simultaneously, the government began reducing ethanol subsidies, thus marking the beginning of the industry's deregulation and the slow extinction of the Program. In 1990, production of neat ethanol vehicles fell to 10.9% of the total car production as consumers lost confidence in the reliability of ethanol fuel supply, and began selling or converting their cars back to gasoline fuel. By the beginning of 1997 Fiat, Ford, and General Motors had all stopped producing ethanol powered cars, leaving only Volkswagen (who offered the Gol, Santana, Kombi and their derivatives). The manufacturers requested a reinstatement of a stable gasohol program and promised to develop products by 1999. Flex fuel era Confidence in ethanol-powered vehicles was restored with the introduction in the Brazilian market of flexible-fuel vehicles starting in 2003. A key innovation in the Brazilian flex technology was avoiding the need for an additional dedicated sensor to monitor the ethanolgasoline mix, which made the first American M85 flex fuel vehicles too expensive. This was accomplished through the lambda probe, used to measure the quality of combustion in conventional engines, is also required to tell the engine control unit (ECU) which blend of gasoline and alcohol is being burned. This task is accomplished automatically through software developed by Brazilian engineers, called "Software Fuel Sensor" (SFS), fed with data from the standard sensors already built-in the vehicle. The technology was developed by the Brazilian subsidiary of Bosch in 1994, but was further improved and commercially implemented in 2003 by the Italian subsidiary of Magneti Marelli. A similar fuel injection technology was developed by the Brazilian subsidiary of Delphi Automotive Systems, and it is called "Multifuel." This technology allows the controller to regulate the amount of fuel injected and spark time, as fuel flow needs to be decreased and also self-combustion needs to be avoided when gasoline is used because ethanol engines have compression ratio around 12:1, too high for gasoline. In March 2003, Volkswagen launched in the Brazilian market the Gol 1.6 Total Flex, the first commercial flexible fuel vehicle capable of running on any blend of gasoline and ethanol. Chevrolet followed three months later with the Corsa 1.8 Flexpower, using an engine developed by a joint-venture with Fiat called PowerTrain. That year production of full flex-fuel reached 39,853 automobiles and 9,411 light commercial vehicles. By 2008, popular manufacturers that build,flexible.fuel,vehicles,are Chevrolet, Fiat, Ford, Peugeot, Renault, Volkswagen, Honda, Mit subishi, Toyota and Citroën. Nissan launched its first flex fuel in the Brazilian market in 2009 and Kia Motors in 2010. Flexible-fuel vehicles were 22% of the car sales in 2004, 73% in 2005, 87.6% in July 2008, and reached a record 94% in August 2009. The production of flex-fuel cars and light commercial vehicles reached the milestone of 10 million vehicles in March 2010, and 15.3 million units by March 2012. As of December 2011, the fleet of flex automobiles and light commercial vehicles had reached 14.8 million vehicles, representing 21% of Brazil's motor vehicle fleet and 31.8% of all registered light vehicles. This rapid adoption of the flex technology was facilitated by the fuel distribution infrastructure already in place, as around 27,000 filling stations countrywide were available by 1997 with at least one ethanol pump, a heritage of the Pró-Álcool program, and by October 2008 have reached 35,000 fueling stations. The flexibility of Brazilian FFVs empowered the consumers to choose the fuel depending on current market prices. The rapid adoption and commercial success of "flex" vehicles, as they are popularly known, together with the mandatory blend of alcohol with gasoline as E25 fuel, have increased ethanol consumption up to the point that during the first two months of 2008 ethanol consumption increased by 56% when compared to the same period in 2007, and achieving a landmark in ethanol consumption in February 2008, when ethanol retail sales surpassed the 50% market share of the gasoline-powered fleet. This level of ethanol fuel consumption had not been reached since the end of the 80s, at the peak of the Pró-Álcool Program. According to two separate research studies conducted in 2009, at the national level 65% of the flex-fuel registered vehicles regularly use ethanol fuel, and all-year-long by 93% of flex car owners in São Paulo, the main ethanol producer state where local taxes are lower, and prices at the pump are more competitive than gasoline. Between 1979 and 2011, Brazil substituted around 22 million pure gasoline-powered vehicles with 5.7 million neat ethanol vehicles, 14.8 million flex-fuel vehicles and almost 1.5 million flex motorcycles. The number of neat ethanol vehicles still in use by 2003 was estimated between 2 and 3 million vehicles and 1.22 million as of December 2011. There were 80 flex car and light truck models available in the market manufactured by 12 major carmakers by December 2011, and four flex-fuel motorcycle models available. The early technology in flex fuel engines had a fuel economy with hydrated ethanol (E100) that was 25 to 35% lower than gasoline, but flex engines are now being designed with higher compression ratios, taking advantage of the higher ethanol blends and maximizing the benefits of the higher oxygen content of ethanol, resulting in lower emissions and improving fuel efficiency, allowing flex engines in 2008 models to reduce the fuel economy gap to 20 to 25% that of gasoline. Latest development Under the auspices of the BioEthanol for Sustainable Transport (BEST) project, the first ethanolpowered (E95 or ED95) bus began operations in São Paulo city on December 2007 as a one-year trial project. The bus is a Scania model with a modified diesel engine capable of running with 95% hydrous ethanol blended with a 5% ignition improver, with a Marcopolo body. Scania adjusted the compression ratio from 18:1 to 28:1, added larger fuel injection nozzles, and altered the injection timing. During the trial period performance and emissions were monitored by the National Reference Center on Biomass (CENBIO - Portuguese: Centro Nacional de Referência em Biomassa) at the Universidade de São Paulo, and compared with similar diesel models, with special attention to carbon monoxide and particulate matter emissions. Performance is also important as previous tests have shown a reduction in fuel economy of around 60% when E95 is compared to regular diesel. In November 2009, a second ED95 bus began operating in São Paulo city. The bus was a Swedish Scania with a Brazilian CAIO body. The second bus was scheduled to operate between Lapa and Vila Mariana, passing through Avenida Paulista, one of the main business centers of São Paulo city. The two test buses operated regularly for 3 years. In November 2010 the municipal government of São Paulo city signed an agreement with UNICA, Cosan, Scania and Viação Metropolitana", the local bus operator, to introduce a fleet of 50 ethanol-powered ED95 buses by May 2011. The city's government objective is to reduce the carbon footprint of the city's bus fleet of 15,000 diesel-powered buses, with a final goal that the entire bus fleet use only renewable fuels by 2018. Scania will manufacture the buses in its plant located in São Bernardo do Campo, São Paulo. These buses use the same technology and fuel as the 700 buses manufactured by Scania and already operating in Stockholm. The first ethanol-powered buses were delivered in May 2011, and the 50 buses will start regular service in June 2011. The fleet of 50 ethanol-powered ED95 buses had a cost of R$ 20 million (US$12.3 million) and due to the higher cost of the ED95 fuel, one of the firms participating in the cooperation agreement, Raísen (a joint venture between Royal Dutch Shell and Cosan), will supply the fuel to the municipality at 70% the market price of regular diesel. Flex fuel motorcycle The latest innovation within the Brazilian flexible-fuel technology is the development of flexfuel motorcycles. In 2007 Magneti Marelli presented the first motorcycle with flex technology. Delphi Automotive Systems also presented in 2007 its own injection technology for motorcycles. Besides the flexibility in the choice of fuels, a main objective of the fuel-flex motorcycles is to reduce CO2 emissions by 20 percent, and savings in fuel consumption in the order of 5% to 10% are expected. The first flex fuel motorcycle was launched to the Brazilian market by Honda in March 2009. Produced by its local subsidiary Moto Honda da Amazônia, the CG 150 Titan Mix is sold for around US$2,700. Because the motorcycle does not have a secondary gas tank for a cold start like the Brazilian flex cars do, the fuel tank must have at least 20% of gasoline to avoid start up problems at temperatures below 15 °C (59 °F). The motorcycle’s panel includes a gauge to warn the driver about the actual ethanol-gasoline mix in the storage tank. During the first eight months after its market launch the CG 150 Titan Mix has sold 139,059 motorcycles, capturing a 10.6% market share, and ranking second in sales of new motorcycles in the Brazilian market in 2009. In September 2009, Honda launched a second flexible-fuel motorcycle, the on-off road NXR 150 Bros Mix. By December 2010 both Honda flexible-fuel motorcycles had reached cumulative production of 515,726 units, representing an 18.1% market share of the Brazilian new motorcycle sales in that year. As of January 2011 there were four flex-fuel motorcycle models available in the market. During 2011 a total of 956,117 flex-fuel motorcycles were produced, raising its market share to 56.7%. Since their inception in 2009 almost 1.5 million flexible-fuel motorcycles had been produced in the country through December 2011, and the two million mark was reached in August 2012. In September 2009, Honda launched a second flexible-fuel motorcycle, the on-off road NXR 150 Bros Mix. By December 2010 both Honda flexible-fuel motorcycles had reached cumulative production of 515,726 units, representing an 18.1% market share of the Brazilian new motorcycle sales in that year. As of January 2011 there were four flex-fuel motorcycle models available in the market. During 2011 a total of 956,117 flex-fuel motorcycles were produced, raising its market share to 56.7%. Since their inception in 2009 almost 1.5 million flexible-fuel motorcycles had been produced in the country through December 2011, and the two million mark was reached in August 2012. New generation of flex engines The Brazilian subsidiaries of Magneti Marelli, Delphi and Bosch have developed and announced the introduction in 2009 of a new flex engine generation that eliminates the need for the secondary gasoline tank by warming the ethanol fuel during starting, and allowing flex vehicles to do a normal cold start at temperatures as low as −5 °C (23 °F),the lowest temperature expected anywhere in the Brazilian territory. Another improvement is the reduction of fuel consumption and tailpipe emissions, between 10% to 15% as compared to flex motors sold in 2008. In March 2009 Volkswagen do Brasil launched the Polo E-Flex, the first flex fuel model without an auxiliary tank for cold start. The Flex Start system used by the Polo was developed by Bosch. 2009-13 supply storage Since 2009 the Brazilian ethanol industry has experienced financial stress due to the credit crunch caused by the economic crisis of 2008; poor sugarcane harvests due to unfavorable weather; high sugar prices in the world market that made more attractive to produce sugar rather than ethanol; and other domestic factors. Brazilian ethanol fuel production in 2011 was 21.1 billion liters (5.6 billion U.S. liquid gallons), down from 26.2 million liters (6.9 billion gallons) in 2010. A supply shortage took place for several months during 2010 and 2011, and prices climbed to the point that ethanol fuel was no longer attractive for owners of flex-fuel vehicles; the government reduced the minimum ethanol blend in gasoline to reduce demand and keep ethanol fuel prices from rising further; and for the first time since the 1990s, ethanol fuel was imported from the United States. As a result of higher ethanol prices caused by the Brazilian ethanol industry crisis, combined with government subsidies set to keep gasoline price lower than the international market value, by November 2013 only 23% flex-fuel car owners were using ethanol regularly, down from 66% in 2009. Companies for ethanol production Raizen Raizen is Brazil’s leading manufacturer of sugarcane ethanol. Its production capacity is about 2.1 billion litres of biofuel per year. Raizon is based from the merger of Shell and Cosan and is now the Brazil’s fifth largest company in terms of billable revenues Granbio GranBio is a Brazilian biotech company. Granbio has experties in transforming biomass into renewable products such as biofuels, biochemicals, nano materials and nutrients. It produces second-generation (2G) ethanol utilizing discarded sugarcane straw and bagasse as raw materail. Granbio’s plant at Alagoas, Brazil is operational since September 2014 and has a capacity to produce 82 million litres of 2G ethanol per annum. This plant is adjacent to Granbio’s another sugarcane based 1G bioethanol plant. Brazil ethanol market For over three decades, Brazil has been a global leader in the production and use of sugarcane based ethanol or ethyl alcohol, a fuel additive that has reduces country's petroleum consumption. Two years after the first global energy crisis in 1973, the Brazilian government introduced its ethanol initiative to decrease dependence on world energy supplies. At its height in the mid1980s, more than three quarters of the 800,000 cars produced in Brazil each year ran on ethanol. However, by 1990, a decline in the supply of sugar based fuel brought the sale of ethanolpowered cars to nearly drop to zero. Since their launch, "flexible-fuel" cars have helped re-ignite ethanol production in Brazil. Today, more than half of all cars in the country are "flexible-fuel" cars. At the same time, ethanol production efficiency has tripled since 1975. The oil crisis of the 1970s led the Brazilian government to address the strain high prices were placing on its fragile economy. Brazil, the largest and most populous country in South America, was importing 80% of its oil and 40% of its foreign exchange was used to pay for that imported oil. In 1975, General Ernesto Geisel, then-president of Brazil, ordered the country's gasoline supply mixed with 10% ethanol. The level was raised to 25% over the next five years, which was intended to maintain a constant Brazilian gasoline supply for an ever-increasing demand. The government assisted the shift by giving sugar companies subsidized loans to build ethanol plants, as well as guaranteeing prices for their ethanol products. Already the world's biggest producer and exporter of sugar, farmers reaped the benefits of this new demand. The 1979 Iranian crisis and related oil price shock accelerated Brazil's conversion of its gasoline supply and automobile fleet. Under the Proalcool Program, sugar companies were ordered to increase production and the state-run oil company, Petrobras, was required to make alcohol (ethanol) available at its fuel stations. The growth in hydrous ethanol, which uses a blend of 9495% ethanol to 5-6% water, rapidly increased during the 1980s, with consumption peaking in 1989. Automobile manufacturers were given tax breaks to produce cars that ran on hydrous ethanol, and, by 1980, every automobile company in Brazil was following this lead. By the mid-1980s, three quarters of the cars manufactured in Brazil were capable of running on sugarcane based hydrous ethanol. However, the drop in oil prices throughout the 1980s and 1990s made it uneconomic for the Brazilian government to continue its hydrous ethanol program. Both production and consumption of ethanol were basically flat for much of the mid-1980s to the mid1990s. After 1995, both production and consumption of ethanol began falling quickly. The Brazilian government's dedication to the ethanol industry declined and incentives given by the government wore off, causing ethanol fueled vehicle production to decline in the late 1980s to early 1990s. As oil prices decreased in the 1990s, the consumer acceptance of ethanol fueled cars greatly decreased and purchases of gasoline fueled automobiles returned to previous levels. The second wave of ethanol fuel production and consumption in the Brazilian market began in the 1990s when the use of anhydrous ethanol started to rise. Anhydrous ethanol is a type of fuel which is more easily combined with gasoline for automobile fuel. The consumption of hydrous ethanol has grown steadily since the 1990s, peaking in 2003. The start of the new millennium brought with it increased oil prices, which in turn sparked a resurgence of Brazil's drive toward energy independence, including a revival of its ethanol program. Although it previously used a hydrous ethanol blend, Brazil shifted toward the aforementioned anhydrous ethanol, which is used in a ratio of ethanol to gasoline of 20-24:80-76. Brazil introduced its current generation of ethanol-powered cars in 2003, the same year in which hydrous ethanol consumption peaked. Named flex fuel vehicles (FFVs), these automobiles run on gasoline, ethanol, or any blend of the two. When the car is filled at the pump, an internal system analyses the mix of the two fuel types and adjusts accordingly. The first such vehicles were introduced by Volkswagen in 2003, and by 2004, they accounted for more than 17% of the Brazilian auto market. In 2005, their sales increased even further, accounting for approximately 54% of all new car sales. The combination of high sales of flex-fuel vehicles and high oil prices further caused Brazil to increase its ethanol production to accommodate an anticipated auto industry demand. In 2005, it produced approximately 285,000 barrels of ethanol per day, an increase from the approximate 200,000 barrels per day in 2002. In 2005, 102 million barrels of ethanol were produced, of which 84 million barrels of ethanol were consumed. The surplus was exported, making Brazil the world's largest ethanol supplier. Yet even with this positive balance of trade and production, ethanol accounted for only 13.6% of Brazil's total transportation fuel consumption in 2005. The consumption of 84 million barrels of ethanol was 13.6% of total oil equivalent consumption of 620 million per year. More than 535 million barrels of other fuels, including gasoline and diesel fuel were consumed. The remaining 86% of Brazil's transportation fuel demand is met by petroleum, and increasingly that petroleum is coming from domestic Brazilian sources. Exemplifying the importance of domestic oil production and exploration, the very declaration of Brazil's energy independence came during the inauguration of a new oil platform that is claimed to create higher domestic oil production than consumption for the first time in Brazil's history. Role of the Sugar Industry Rising ethanol demand in global markets is driving the growth of Brazil's sugar/ethanol complex with new investments in infrastructure and technology. The recent rise in crude oil prices, paired with a global effort for renewable energy development and a growing domestic demand for ethanol have been the key factors driving the recent expansion of Brazil's sugar and ethanol industries. As ethanol in Brazil is made from sugarcane, sugar industry developments are now increasingly linked to policy initiatives in ethanol markets. Sugar represents a particularly important component of Brazil's economy, with the sugar/ethanol industry contributing 2% to national GDP. The value of production in 2006 reached $8 billion, which represents 17% of the country's agricultural output. The sugar sector generates 21% of total exports and employs 1 million people, or 2% of the labor force. Brazil's total sugarcane production, equivalent to 31% of the global production in 2006, reached 423 million tons. Brazil is also the largest raw and refined sugar producer, accounting for 20% of the global sugar production. Growing global interest in Brazil's ethanol sector and developments in the sugar industry significantly affect country's sugar production which reached 28.7 million tons in 2006. Brazil exported 18.3 million tons of sugar, accounting for 41% of the world's sugar exports. Brazilian ethanol exports in 2006 of 1 billion gallons represented 52% of the world's ethanol market. Ethanol Costs and Pricing Brazil, the world's leading ethanol exporter, also has the world's lowest cost of producing the Biofuel. There are no clear statistics for the cost of production of ethanol in Brazil, analysts believe that it ranges anywhere from between BRL0.40 to BRL0.60 ($0.21-$0.31) per liter, depending on the mill and whether the sugarcane mill buys its sugarcane from suppliers. For mills buying cane, the cost to produce ethanol is about BRL0.56 ($0.29) per liter, since the cost of a ton of sugarcane is BRL38.00 ($19.80). For those who have their own sugarcane, the cost is less, perhaps as low as BRL0.48 per liter. According to Sao Paulo's Institute of Agricultural Economics, the average price of producing ethanol was estimated to be between BRL0.40 to BRL0.45 per liter; however, the Agricultural Ministry's figures are around BRL0.55 per liter. Ethanol prices are rising in the domestic market as Brazil while demand from flexible fuel vehicles increases. Brazilian government is analyzing a proposal to lower the ethanol mixture in gasoline to 20% from the current 25% while the country is short on supply. The plan may help lower ethanol prices. Still, gasoline prices may increase as a higher proportion of the fuel in the mixture would make it more expensive to consumers. Further, Brazil is increasing the area planted for sugarcane as domestic and international demand for ethanol boosts prices and profit. Ethanol prices in the international market may keep rising as the fluid is used for fuel and as a substitute for oil derivatives in the chemical industry. Around 40 sugar mills and distilleries were under construction in Brazil in 2006. Farmers have boosted area planted in cane by 4.5% to 5.88 million hectares, or 14.5 million acres. Brazil may harvest up to 30 million tons more sugarcane in the 2006-2007 crop, raising ethanol production to 18.3 billion liters and sugar output by 1 million tons to 27.7 million tons. The sustained capacity to improve and diversify its production by investing in R&D is one of the most important factors underlying the success and growth of Brazil's ethanol industry. Sugarcane productivity has risen steadily at a 2.3% growth rate between 1975 and 2004. Industrial productivity growth is not as brisk, increasing on average 1.17% since 1975. This growth rate is the result of new variety development, biological pest control introduction, improved management, and greater soil selectively. These efforts were initiated by the Sao Paulo state government's the Instituto Agronmico de Campinas (IAC) and Instituto Biolgico. By 1970, Copersucar, a private cooperative of sugar and cane producers, created a Center for Technological Research. This research center was instrumental in the expansion of sugarcane production and the industrial development of the sector. In 1971 the federal government created the Programa Nacional de Melhoramento da Cana-de-Acar (Planalsucar) with a particular focus on the development of new sugarcane varieties. Planalsucar was created to reduce the technology growth rate difference between industry and production within the Brazilian sugarcane sector. With industry developing faster, an agricultural production lag could eventually result in bottlenecks for sugar and ethanol producers. Future growth of the sector continues to depend on sugar exports and domestic sales of ethanol, but ethanol exports are now a strategic variable for this industry. The importance of the latter can be better understood considering that by now Brazil has already substituted a great deal of gasoline for ethanol. Production of ethanol, if based just on the domestic market, will accompany economic growth and the increase in automobile demand. However, Japan, the US, and the European Union still have a long way to go to in the substitution of gasoline. This may be the source of a big push, one that can double or triple current levels of ethanol production. Brazil seeks to produce enough ethanol to replace 10% of the gasoline consumed worldwide by 2012, which requires doubling its current production and increasing the share of exports in total output to 20% from the current 15%. Sugar exports are also forecast to increase, with the share of sugar produced going to the export market increasing to 70%. According to the projections of the government's energy research company EPE, Brazil's ethanol production is expected to total 66.57 billion liters by 2030. The current 5.6 million hectares destined for ethanol production will stand at 13.9 million hectares in 2030; the increase, however, will come from pasture land. At present, Brazil has 210 million hectares of pastures and it is possible that it would be cut in half without harming the cattle. The strong increase in Brazil's ethanol production will enable the country to gradually raise its future ethanol exports. In 2030, Brazil's ethanol exports are forecast to total 12 billion liters. The country's ethanol domestic consumption is expected to total 54.7 billion liters in 2030. According to the Brazilian Ministry of Agriculture by 2008, over 60% of harvested cane is expected to go into ethanol production as ethanol production facilities continue to be built. Planting of sugarcane and construction of new sugar/ethanol mills generally require a startup phase of 3-5 years. Despite recent rapid growth and new investments in the sector, ethanol supply still lags behind demand. While ethanol production remains a priority for the Brazilian government, oil production and exploration accounts for the majority of Brazil's progress toward energy independence. Oil still accounts for a major part of Brazil's fuel usage and efforts to improve the efficiency and increased productivity of its oil platforms are well underway. The revived ethanol program does indeed provide a fraction of Brazil's energy needs. Increased levels of production and greater mechanization of sugarcane farming makes Brazil the largest producer and exporter of sugarcane and ethanol in world. The claim of energy independence, however, requires careful examination and interpretation. Ethanol alone has not created an energy independent Brazil; rather, increased oil production has most significantly contributed to achieving that goal. Brazil’s economic and political crises are proving to be a boon to one of the nation’s most embattled sectors: ethanol producers. Drivers, who used to switch between ethanol and gas depending on the price gap, are now just going for the cheaper, less-efficient ethanol as they try to cut short-term spending amid a battle with inflation as high as 10.7 percent, rising unemployment and an economy contracting at the fastest pace in a century. That’s helping keep ethanol prices at a record high for more than three months. "The idea that consumers would migrate back to gas just isn’t happening," said Martinho Ono, chief executive officer at ethanol broker SCA Etanol do Brasil. "It’s the same thinking as the person who goes to the supermarket and picks the cheaper brand. In a difficult situation like the one we’re in today, that perception of the economy ends up trumping rational thinking." Traditionally, drivers choose ethanol to fuel their cars when it’s below 70 percent of the price of gasoline, as the biofuel extracted from sugar cane yields about 30 percent less energy per liter. Now, the difference at the pump -- it costs about 1 real ($0.25) less per liter to fuel with ethanol at current prices -- is prevailing. Ethanol was consistently sold at 72 to 75 percent of the price of gasoline from November to January, up from 66 percent a year earlier, data from the National Oil Agency show. "Ethanol continues to get consumers’ preference," Mirian Bacchi and Ivelise Bragato, analysts at University of Sao Paulo’s Cepea, an agriculture research center, said in a report on Feb. 22. While the income restriction is an explanation, it’s also possible that part of drivers "considers that the biofuel is still competitive above the 70 percent mark," they said. Ethanol Sales Sales of hydrous ethanol by fuel distributors in the last three months rose 10 percent from a year earlier, while sales of gasoline shrank 9.3 percent. Over the past 12 months, ethanol sales climbed 36 percent to a record 17.8 billion liters as the biofuel became a more attractive option following a rise in gasoline taxes a year ago. Ethanol fell to as low as 60 percent of the gasoline price during the production peak in August, a move that led consumers to wipe out the nation’s inventories. Plinio Nastari, the president of consulting firm Datagro, expects hydrous ethanol inventories at the end of the current 2015-16 crop year will be about 300 million liters, down from 1.2 billion liters a year earlier, as consumption remains "surprisingly resilient." The record demand has been helping sugar and ethanol producers recover from years of poor results. With an 85 percent increase in ethanol sales, Biosev SA, Louis Dreyfus Commodities Holdings’s sugar unit and Brazil’s second-largest producer, posted a net profit in the three months ended in December after eight consecutive quarterly losses. Biofuel sales from competitor Sao Martinho SA more than doubled in the same quarter, boosting net income to a record for the period. Analyst Forecasts That has helped push Sao Martinho’s shares up 36 percent over the past year, compared to a 16 percent drop in Brazil’s benchmark stock gauge. Analysts surveyed by Bloomberg are expecting net adjusted income to rise by 48 percent next fiscal year following a 13 percent increase in the year ending March 31. Biosev is up 16 percent, with analysts expecting the company to get its first annual profit since 2011 next year. Transport fuel demand is likely to decline with the consensus lowering of Brazil’s 2016 GDP outlook, but analysts say they expect the sugar and ethanol industry to outperform all other sectors. Hydrous ethanol output is projected to increase 4.5 percent to 17.6 billion liters in the season starting in April amid higher sugar-cane supplies, and sugar mills are expecting crushing to start in March in order to take advantage of record prices before production peaks, says Bruno Lima, an analyst at INTL FCStone in Campinas. While current demand levels are a positive sign, the persistent slowdown in the Brazilian economy may eventually curb biofuel consumption, he said. "The question mark is if consumers will continue to demand more ethanol instead of the more expensive gasoline or if the crisis will lead to a general drop in fuel consumption," Lima said. WHAT DROVE THE PRICE INCREASE? Higher international sugar prices, triggered by a global sugar shortage, also proved to be supportive for Brazilian ethanol prices. The average price for hydrous ethanol ex-mill Ribeirao Preto from April 1 to December 21 was Real 1,844.31/cu m, a rise of 18.81% year on year. However, recent forecasts by analysts showing a world sugar surplus for the 2017-18 crop year, which starts in October, have been pushing down prices in the New York No. 11 futures market. Since the start of the 2016-17 global sugar crop year, the highest No. 11 sugar futures settlement was 23.81 cents/lb on October 5, 2016, but in the last three months, No. 11 futures have plunged more than 5.61 cents/lb, or 23.56%, to settle on December 21 at 18.20 cents/lb. While support from sugar shrinks, ethanol has gained some support from a an announcement by Brazilian state company Petrobras on December 5 that it would raise diesel prices ex-refinery by an average of 9.5% and gasoline prices by an average of 8.1%. WHAT 2017 WILL BRING TO THE ETHANOL SECTOR The difference between exported sugar and ethanol prices has been gradually narrowing, reaching parity at one point before widening again. Ethanol still pays about 114 points below sugar, but because mills have maximized sugar production to the detriment of ethanol production as intercrop season nears and stocks are low, this could add support to ethanol prices. The news that gasoline prices were set to increase also supported ethanol prices, particularly hydrous ethanol, which competes directly with gasoline at the pump. Hydrous ethanol needs to be about 70% of the price of gasoline to compensate for its lower energy content and be more attractive for drivers of flex-fuel vehicles, which operate on gasoline, hydrous ethanol or any mixture,of,the,two,fuels. "Considering the tightness in the hydrous ethanol stocks we cannot gain competitiveness against gasoline at the pump, so we saw a great opportunity to increase ex-mill prices despite the lack of buying liquidity," a sugar and ethanol producer said of the move by Petrobras. Brazilian Otto-cycle demand, or demand for gasoline and ethanol from spark ignition engine vehicles, is estimated to drop 1.3% in 2016. Ethanol will account for 36.3% of total Otto-cycle. fall further. Ethanol production for 2017 is expected to be 26.855 million cubic meters, down 5% from 2016, according to forecast from Kingsman, Platts' agricultural analysis unit. INTERNATIONAL-TRADING As a result of lower ethanol production, the Brazilian role in international trade flows has started to,change. Brazilian ethanol producers have a chance to increase the profit margin on ethanol due to higher domestic prices, which for many small producers was seen as light in the end of the tunnel. Following a financial crash five years ago, the Brazilian mills that have survived see an opportunity to revive production as the local fuel price policy becomes more transparent and the Comparing the US and Brazil With sugarcane as one of the most efficient photosynthesizers in the plant kingdom, Brazil's sugarcane-based ethanol production is far more efficient than the US's corn-based production. Brazilian distillers are able to produce ethanol for 22 cents/liter, compared to the United States' 30 cents/liter. [6] The process to obtain ethanol from corn costs more because corn starch must first be converted into sugar before being distilled into alcohol; sugarcane already contains the sugar in the form necessary to produce ethanol. The table below summarizes differences in the main characteristics of ethanol fuel production between the United States and Brazil. What’s the most energy efficient crop source for ethanol? Biofuel is the hot topic lately in the green blogosphere. There’s legitimate dispute about the political and environmental wisdom of plant-based fuels, but at the very least everyone should be starting from a valid, shared set of numbers (oh, to dream). In an attempt to offer up such numbers, I’m going to … rip off somebody smarter than me. Namely, Lester Brown, founder of the Worldwatch Institute, founder of the Earth Policy Institute, and author of the recently released Plan B 2.0, which is the best big-picture summary of our environmental situation I’ve ever read (and I’m only 2/3 through it!). The entire thing can be downloaded for free from EPI’s site. There are two key indicators when evaluating various crops for biofuel: fuel yield per acre and net energy yield of the biofuel, minus energy used in production and refining. Crop yields can vary widely. Ethanol yields given are from optimal growing regions. Biodiesel yield estimates are conservative. The energy content of ethanol is about 67 percent that of gasoline. The energy content of biodiesel is about 90 percent that of petroleum diesel. Here’s what the book has to say about the second indicator, net energy yield: For net energy yield, ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil is in a class all by itself, yielding over 8 units of energy for each unit invested in cane production and ethanol distillation. Once the sugary syrup is removed from the cane, the fibrous remainder, bagasse, is burned to provide the heat needed for distillation, eliminating the need for an additional external energy source. This helps explain why Brazil can produce cane-based ethanol for 60¢ per gallon. Ethanol from sugar beets in France comes in at 1.9 energy units for each unit of invested energy. Among the three principal feedstocks now used for ethanol production, U.S. corn-based ethanol, which relies largely on natural gas for distillation energy, comes in a distant third in net energy efficiency, yielding only 1.5 units of energy for each energy unit used. Another perhaps more promising option for producing ethanol is to use enzymes to break down cellulosic materials, such as switchgrass, a vigorously growing perennial grass, or fast-growing trees, such as hybrid poplars. Ethanol is now being produced from cellulose in a small demonstration plant in Canada. If switchgrass turns out to be an economic source of ethanol, as some analysts think it may, it will be a major breakthrough, since it can be grown on land that is highly erodible or otherwise not suitable for annual crops. In a competitive world market for crop-based ethanol, the future belongs to sugarcane and switchgrass. The ethanol yield per acre for switchgrass is calculated at 1,150 gallons, higher even than for sugarcane. The net energy yield, however, is roughly 4, far above the 1.5 for corn but less than the 8 for sugarcane. For the most part, I’ll leave readers to do what they will with these numbers. But one thing seems quite clear: Corn-based ethanol is a friggin’ boondoggle. It’s just about the worst source for ethanol, requiring enormous acreage and producing very little energy relative to energy inputs. The recent enthusiasm for ethanol among the powers-that-be in the U.S. has much more to do with massive corporate subsidies than any genuine interest in a sustainable energy future. I’m guessing Bush’s talk about switchgrass, etc. is largely to provide cover for these subsidies. Ethanol fuels ozone pollution Running vehicles on ethanol rather than petrol can increase ground-level ozone pollution, according to a study of fuel use in São Paulo, Brazil. Ozone (O3) is a major urban pollutant that can cause severe respiratory problems. It can form when sunlight triggers chemical reactions involving hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emitted by vehicles. Ethanol has been promoted as a ‘green’ fuel because its combustion tends to produce lower emissions of carbon dioxide, hydrocarbons and NOx than petrol. But the impact on air quality of a wholesale transition from petrol to ethanol has been difficult to assess, with different atmospheric chemistry models predicting a variety of consequences. Alberto Salvo, an economist at the National University of Singapore, and Franz Geiger, a physical chemist at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, have now answered the question with hard data. Their study, published today in Nature Geoscience1, unpacks what happened when the motorists of São Paulo — the largest city in the Southern Hemisphere — suddenly changed their fuel habits. Sugar high In 2011, about 40% of the city’s 6 million light vehicles — mostly cars — were able to burn pure ethanol or a petrol-ethanol blend, and both fuels were widely available. Consumers in São Paulo thus had more choice over their fuel than almost anywhere else in the world, says Salvo. Between 2009 and 2011, the price of ethanol rose and fell in response to fluctuations in the global prices of sugar, which is used to produce ethanol via fermentation. But the governmentcontrolled gasoline price remained steady. This led to a huge shift in fuel consumption — wholesalers’ figures suggest that gasoline’s share of total transport fuel rose from 42% to 68%. “Our study is the only one where you have a large switch over a relatively short timescale,” says Salvo. São Paulo also has an extensive network of air-monitoring stations that record the atmospheric consequences of its notorious traffic congestion. Salvo and Geiger collated these air-quality measurements and used other data sets — detailing meteorological and traffic conditions, for example — to weed out other factors that would have affected air quality over that period. Overall, they report, the rise in gasoline consumption caused an average drop of 15 micrograms per cubic metre (15 μgm–3) in ground-level ozone concentration, down from a weekday average of 68 μgm–3. But air-quality campaigners should not start advocating for petrol instead of ethanol quite yet. Increased petrol burning clearly raised levels of NOx, which also poses direct health concerns, and it probably boosted the amount of particulate matter in the air, something the study did not look at. And because every city has its own unique air chemistry, a similar fuel switch might produce very different results in London or Los Angeles. Nevertheless, says Salvo, the findings illustrate that “ethanol is not a panacea”. Bioethanol production feedstock and technologies Displays liquid biofuels configurations for bioethanol and biodiesel. Through biological routes, bioethanol may be produced based on any biomass containing significant amounts of starch or sugars. Nowadays, there is a slight predominance of production based on starchy materials (53% out of the total), such as corn, wheat and other cereals and grains. In such cases, conversion technology typically starts by separating, cleaning and milling the grains. Milling may be wet, where grains are steeped and fractionated before the starch conversion into sugar (wet milling process), or dry, when this is done during the conversion process (dry milling process). In both cases starch is typically converted into sugars by means of an enzymatic process, applying high temperatures. Sugars released are then yeast-fermented and the wine produced is distillate to purify bioethanol. In addition to bioethanol, these processes typically involve several coproducts, which differ according to the biomass used. Process Sugar-based bioethanol production — such as sugarcane and sugar beet — is a simple process and requires one step less than starch-bioethanol, since sugars are already present in biomass. Generally, the process is based on extraction of sugars which may be then taken straight to fermentation. The wine is distilled after fermentation, such as in starch-based production. Figure 7 summarizes the technology routes for bioethanol production, considering different feedstocks. It should be noted that cellulose-based bioethanol production still is in laboratory and pilot-plant stages, with technological and economic obstacles to overcome and not having yet significant presence within the energy context. Graph 8 compares different routes for bioethanol production, illustrating the differences within productivity indexes per cultivated area. Data is from the literature [GPC (2008)] and in the cases of sugarcane and sorghum it has been modified to fit the analyses presented in this study. The results correspond to crops with good productivity, which, in some cases can imply high inputs use. Industrial technologies for sugar and starch conversion into bioethanol, underlying such graph, may be considered as well-developed and available, except those related to hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials, currently under development (see Chapter 5). The Graph takes into account an 80-ton production of sugarcane per hectare, a productivity of 85 litres of bioethanol per ton of processed sugarcane and the use of 30% of bagasse available and half of the straw converted into bioethanol at a ratio of 400 litres per ton of dry cellulosic biomass. Average ethanol productivity per area for different crops Out of the 51 billion litres of bioethanol produced in 2006 [F. O. Licht (2006)], 72% was produced by US (corn bioethanol) and Brazil (sugarcane bioethanol), as shown in Graph 9 [RFA (2008)]. Because of their significant importance to the biofuel context, production technologies involving corn and sugarcane will be discussed at large in the following sections, addressing the most relevant agricultural aspects. Distribution of world ethanol production in 2006 Sugarcane bioethanol Sugarcane is a semi-perennial plant with C4-type photosynthetic cycle, genus Saccharum, family Gramineae, consisting of perennial tall grass species, native of warm and tropical Asian temperature zones, especially from India. The aerial part of the plant is essentially formed by stalks, containing saccharose, and by tips and leaves, which form the sugarcane straw, as shown in Figure 8. These components altogether sum around 35 tons of dry material per hectare. Sugarcane is the one of the most important commercial crops all over the world. It occupies more than 20 million hectares in which nearly 1,300 million tons were produced in 2006/2007. Brazil stands out as the leading producer with a cropland area of around 7 million hectares, representing close to 42% of total production. The internationally adopted sugar harvest season begins in September and ends in August of the following year. Graph 10 presents the ten leading sugarcane producers of 2005 crop. – Leading sugarcane producing countries The ideal weather to cultivate sugarcane is one that has two distinct growing seasons: a warm and wet season, to make possible the sprouting, tilling and vegetative development, followed by a cold and dry season, which promotes the maturation and the consequent accumulation of saccharose in stems. Sugarcane does not attain good productivity in climates such as those found in wet equatorial regions; thus, it makes little sense for the Amazon forest to be used for extensive commercial sugarcane cultivation. The complete sugarcane cycle varies, depending on the local weather, crop varieties and practices. In Brazil the cycle typically requires six years and comprises five cuts, as described below. The first cut is generally made 12 or 18 months after planting (depending on sugarcane varieties), when the so-called “cane-plant” is harvested. The other cuts, from ratoon cane (cane stalks resprouting), are harvested once a year four years in a row, with a gradual reduction of productivity. At this moment it is generally more cost-effective to reform (replant) the sugarcane plantation. The old sugarcane is then replaced by a new crop and a new production cycle begins. During sugarcane crop reform the cropland remains in fallow for some months and may receive other short-cycle crops, such as leguminous plants. Following the sugarcane six-years production cycle, production areas must be subdivided into large planting fields at different cycle stages, with around one sixth of the total area for each stage to obtain a fairly stable production for several harvests and make appropriate use of resources and good agricultural practices (machinery and manpower). A significant consequence of this production cycle in sugarcane bioethanol production units is that agricultural activities must start two to three years before the effective industrial production, to allow for a fairly stable feedstock production within three to four years. Techniques such as direct seed cropping schemes and controlled traffic farming systems are being developed to reduce costs and preserve soil fertility. Such techniques allow increasing the number of cuts while maintaining high productivity levels [CGEE (2007b)]. Given that the typical sugarcane production cycle has five cuts during six years, average annual productivity must take into account the sugarcane crop reform period. Moreover, as part of the sugarcane produced (around 8%) is used to reform (replant) the sugarcane field, annual productivity measured in tons of sugarcane effectively processed per hectare of cropland is below the total productivity computed on the basis of sugarcane harvested. On average, annual productivity is highly influenced by climatic variability and by specificities of producing areas, with ranges from 50 t/ha to 100 t/ha (weight of wet stem). Average productivity in Brazil is around 70 t/ha of sugarcane, which is equivalent to the figures from the best producing regions in other countries. Although there are sugarcane productivity records reaching 200 t/ha [Janick (2007)], in the Center-South Region of Brazil — where most of Brazilian mills are located — these rates range from 78 t/ha to 80 t/ha. In the State of São Paulo — the main producer — they range from 80 t/ha to 85 t/ha. [Unica (2008)]. Annex 2 presents sugarcane average productivity values in Brazil, in tons per hectare harvested. presents an overview of the main sugarcane crop parameters, as practiced in the Brazilian Center-South Region [Macedo (2005) and CTC (2005)]. Pol and fibre percentage based on mass of sugarcane correspond, respectively, to the saccharose apparent content and the bagasse content in sugarcane. In addition to saccharose, depending on its maturation, sugarcane contains around 0.5% of other sugars (such as glucose and fructose) not used for production of solid sugar, but possible to be used to produce bioethanol [Fernandes (2003)] also shows that fertilizers demand for sugarcane crops is reduced when compared to other crops, because sugarcane industrial waste returns to the cropland as fertilizer. The use of synthetic nitrogen is low, and in the areas where vinasse is applied all potassium is supplied by fertigation. In spite of being a crop with high water demand, rainfall rates higher than 800 mm (best scenario between 1,200 mm and 1,500 mm) and properly distributed (well-defined rainy and drain periods) are enough to reach good productivity. In the Brazilian Center-South typical producing units (using half of sugarcane to produce sugar and the other half to produce bioethanol) the application of vinasse represents around 15 mm to 20 mm in 30% of the sugarcane cropland area and virtually eliminates the need for irrigation. The values shown for vinasse and cake filter application refer to values recommended in typical conditions for the State of São Paulo, according to the environmental laws. Harvest time Sugarcane harvest periods vary according to rainfall to allow cutting and transportation operations while reaching the best maturation point and maximizing sugar accumulation. In the Brazilian Center-South Region harvest goes from April to December, while in the Northeast Region harvest takes place from August to April. The traditional harvest system — which is still used in nearly 70% of sugarcane crops in Brazil and involves the previous burning of the sugarcane crop and the manual cut of the whole stalk sugarcane — is being progressively replaced by the mechanized harvest of green chopped sugarcane (without burning), due to environmental restrictions on burning practices. Recent agreements between the government and producers made for an estimate of all sugarcane to be mechanically harvested by 2020, without previously burning the sugarcane crop. After it is cut sugarcane is promptly transported to the mill to avoid saccharose losses. Except for a few companies that use some sort of waterway transport, the transportation system is based on trucks — single-trailer truck, twin-trailer truck, triple trailer truck, road train — with cargo capacity between 15 and 60 tons. In recent years sugarcane logistics has undergone significant development, involving integrated operations of cutting, shipment and transportation, to cut costs and diminish soil compaction. Sugarcane cannot be stored for more than a few days and mills operate only during the harvest period, irrespective of the type of facility. The initial processing stages for bioethanol are basically the same as for sugar production, as shown in Figure 10. Once in the mill sugarcane is generally washed (only the whole stalk sugarcane) and sent to the preparation and extraction phases. Extraction is made by roll-mills — arranged in sets from four to seven successive threeroll mills — that separate the sugarcane juice containing saccharose from the bagasse, which is sent to the mill’s power plant to be used as fuel. In some new units implemented in Brazil extraction by diffusion is being adopted and expected to deliver some advantages as far as energy is concerned. In that process chopped and shredded sugarcane is repeatedly washed with hot water inside diffusers, where it releases sugars through a leaching process. Then the product is pressed through a drying roller, which generates the bagasse to be used in boilers. Produced in the mill or diffuser, the juice containing sugars can be then used in sugar or bioethanol production. In sugar production the juice is initially screened and chemically treated for coagulation, flocculation and precipitation of impurities, which are eliminated through decanting. The filter cake, used as fertilizer, is generated by recovering sugar out of the decanted slurry by means of rotary vacuum filters. The treated juice is then concentrated in multiple-effect evaporators and crystallized. In such process only part of the saccharose available in the sugarcane is crystallized and the residual solution with high sugar content (honey) can be used in the process once again to recover more sugar. The honey produced — also called molasses — does not return to the sugar manufacturing process but can be used as an input for bioethanol production through fermentation, because it still contains some saccharose and a high amount of reducing sugars (such as glucose and fructose, resulting from saccharose decomposition). Thus, sugarcane bioethanol production may be based on fermentation, whether using the sugarcane juice alone or using a mix of juice and molasse, the latter being more frequently practiced in Brazil. In sugarcane-juice bioethanol the first stages of the manufacturing process, from sugarcane receipt to initial juice treatment, are similar to the sugar manufacturing process. In a more well-rounded treatment the juice is limed, heated and decanted as in the sugar process. After treatment the juice is evaporated to balance its sugars concentration and, in some cases, it is mixed to molasse, generating sugarcane mash, a sugary solution which is ready to be fermented. The mash is sent to fermentation reactors, where yeasts are added to it (single-celled fungi of Saccharomyces cerevisae species) and fermented for a period ranging from 8 to 12 hours, generating wine (fermented mash, with ethanol concentration from 7% to 10%). The most common fermentation process in Brazilian distillery is Melle-Boinot, characterized by recovery of wine yeasts by means of centrifugation. Then, after fermentation yeasts are recovered and treated for new use, while the wine is sent to distillation columns. – Sugar and sugarcane-based bioethanol production flowchart In distillation bioethanol is initially recovered in hydrated form. Nearly 96° GL (percent in volume) corresponds to around 6% of water in weight, producing vinasse or stillage as residue, generally at a ratio of 10 to 13 litres per liter of hydrated bioethanol produced. In this process, other liquid fractions are also separated, producing second generation alcohols and fusel oil. Hydrated bioethanol can be stored as final product or may be sent to the dehydration column. Nevertheless, as it is an azeotropic mixture, its components cannot be separated by distillation only. The most commonly-used technology in Brazil is dehydration with addition of cyclohexane, forming a ternary azeotropic mixture, with boiling point lower than that of anhydrous bioethanol. In the dehydration column, cyclohexane is added on top, and the anhydrous bioethanol is removed from the bottom, with nearly 99.7° GL or 0.4% of water in weight. The ternary mixture removed from the top is condensed and decanted, while the part with high water content is sent to the cyclohexane recovery column. Bioethanol dehydration also can be made by adsorption with molecular sieves or by means of extractive distillation with monoethyleneglycol (MEG), which stand out as providers of lower energy consumption, as well as by their higher costs. Due to increasing requirements in foreign markets several bioethanol producers in Brazil and in other countries have been choosing molecular sieves, since they allow producing anhydrous bioethanol free from contaminants. The possibility of using sugars from sugarcane exclusively or non-exclusively to produce bioethanol represents a significant adaptation technology in this agroindustry, which sugar mills can use to arbitrage — within certain limits — a cost-effective production program, depending on price conditions, existing demand and other market perspectives. Actually, to take advantage of such flexibility several Brazilian mills have sugar and bioethanol manufacturing lines, each one capable of processing 75% of the juice produced, allowing a margin of 50% of the total processing capacity against the extraction capacity of the mill. Water discharges in bioethanol production are relatively high. Currently, considering the Brazilian Center-South scenario, around 1.8 m3 of water are collected per ton of processed sugarcane; however, such figure is significantly going down as a result of recycling initiatives, which allow reducing both the water collection level and treated water disposal. This aspect will be analyzed in-depth. Considering the entire sugarcane bioethanol production cycle, the residues generated in the process are vinasse (from 800 to 1,000 litres per ton of processed sugarcane for bioethanol), filter cake (around 40 kg of wet output per ton of processed sugarcane) and boiler ashes [Elia Neto (2007)]. As said before, in the Brazilian mills such residues are well appreciated by-products that once recycled can be used as fertilizers, contributing to both significantly reduce the need for mineral fertilizers and avoid the need for irrigating sugarcane crops. As bioethanol production involves significant water elimination, the energy demand is high, particularly concerning thermal power, as shown in Table 8. Steam demand in hydrated bioethanol considers the conventional technology consuming 3.0 kg to 3.5 kg of steam per litre of bioethanol produced; in anhydrous ethanol demand is estimated considering an azeotropic distillation process using cyclohexane that consumes 1.5 kg to 2.0 kg of steam per litre of bioethanol produced. As far as electric power demand is concerned, there are slight distinctions between processes, but all of them are around 12 kWh per ton of processed sugarcane. In the sugarcane-based bioethanol agroindustry all energy consumed in the process can be supplied by a heat-and-power production system (cogeneration system) installed in the mill, using only bagasse as an energy source. Actually, many sugarcane mills all over the world produce a significant part of the energy they consume. Particularly in Brazil, mills are energy selfsustained and they often manage to export increasing amounts of electric power surpluses to the public grid, thanks to the growing use of energy-efficient equipment. More details on the arrangement of power facilities in mills and their energy-production potential is discussed. Regarding industrial yield, one ton of sugarcane used exclusively for sugar production generates around 100 kg of sugar as well as over 20 litres of bioethanol using molasses. Data for Brazil is presented in Table 9, using average figures from nearly 60 mills in the State of São Paulo (figures adapted from CTC, 2005); losses refers to an average sugarcane with a 14% saccharose content. One ton of sugarcane may produce 86 litres of hydrated bioethanol in bioethanol-only production; or 100 kg of sugar plus 23 litres of hydrated bioethanol out of molasses in sugar production. Figures in the last case correspond to a sugar production process with two masses (successive crystallization processes), in which honey is not depleted but sent with relative high content of saccharose for bioethanol production, which allows enhancing the product quality and reducing energy consumption to produce sugar. In a nutshell, synergies and complementary relationships between the sugar and bioethanol production help cutting costs and increasing the efficiency of agroindustrial processes. Why biofuels? By 2035, global energy consumption is expected to grow by 32%, and the demand for liquid fuels is forecast to increase by 18%, just over 15 million more barrels per day. The world’s population is expected to rise to 8.7 billion, meaning there will be 1.6 billion more people requiring energy. These projections raise some fundamental questions. Are we able to meet the growing demand for energy? How can we confront climate change if we depend exclusively on fossil fuels to meet this increasing demand? This is where biofuels can help. Over the next two decades, biofuels should represent 20% (in energy) of the growth in transport fuels. BP is convinced that a significant increase in the use of biofuels, produced responsibly using carefully selected raw materials, will help to reduce global emissions of greenhouse gases. A range of initiatives are being launched around the world. The European Union has committed to reducing its general emissions to a minimum of 20% below 1990 levels by 2020. One of the ways it intends to meet this objective is by raising the percentage of renewable fuels, including biofuels, to 20% by 2020. The Unites States plan to increase biofuel consumption from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion in 2022 (1 gallon contains 3.7854 litres). Biofuels currently account for 2.5% of transport fuels. In 2035 this number is expected to increase to 4%. As well as increasing safety in energy supply and encouraging improvements and innovation within agriculture, we are convinced that this increase in biofuel consumption will lead to a reduction in the CO2 emissions associated with road transport. A big step forward in Brazil Can we really substitute fossil fuels for biofuels in our cars? It isn’t so simple, but Brazil took the lead when it diversified its energy sources in order to combat concerns about power supply security, investing in alternative energy sources such as hydroelectricity and biofuels. Today, 45% of its energy comes from renewable sources and approximately 90% of new passenger vehicles sold in Brazil contain flex-fuel engines, which work using any combination of gasoline and sugarcane ethanol. This has led to significant changes in the country’s CO2 emissions, with 600 million tons of CO2 being avoided since the 1970s. Source: the Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Association (UNICA) Reduced emission Sugarcane ethanol and bioelectricity are renewable energy solutions that cut greenhouse gases (GHG) significantly when compared to fossil fuels. But what does this environmental benefit mean in practice? Here are a few examples drawn from Brazil’s experience. For every liter of ethanol consumed in a flex-fuel engine that runs on either gasoline or ethanol, an average of 1.7 kg of carbon dioxide is not emitted. Since flex-fuel vehicles were first launched in March 2003, Brazil has avoided emitting more than 350 million tons of carbon dioxide. To remove a similar amount of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, you would need to plant 2.5 billion native trees and maintain them for 20 years. Without sugarcane ethanol and bioelectricity, Brazilian greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation and power generation sectors would have been 22% higher in 2006 and could be 43% higher in 2020. Ethanol also lowers the cost of controlling global warming. Each liter used saves US$0.20 that would otherwise have to be spent on measures to mitigate GHG emissions. Since the start of Brazil’s ethanol program in 1975, more than 600 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions have been avoided thanks to the use of this clean and renewable fuel. These environmental benefits should only increase in the future given the level of investments in new technologies, such as mechanized harvesting and installation of high-efficiency boilers, ensuring the Brazilian sugar-energy sector remains an important player in the fight against climate change. Brazil weighs new ethanol policy as mills focus on sugar Nov 28 The Brazilian government is preparing a program to stimulate ethanol production with the aim of curbing the country's gasoline imports, the energy minister said on Monday, at a time when local refining capacity is expected to plateau. The move comes at a moment when cane mills are maximizing sugar output at the expense of ethanol. The sweetener is giving mills better returns than ethanol as the world's sugar supplies have tightened. Brazilian Energy Minister Fernando Coelho Filho said during a conference in Sao Paulo organized by cane industry group Unica that a program called RenovaBio 2030 will be concluded after public consultation during the first quarter next year. The program will draw up guidelines to increase the use of biofuels in Brazil in the next decade. But no concrete steps, such as a possible additional taxation on fossil-based fuels as Unica has asked for, have been put forward. Ethanol producers favor possible measures that could shake the product out of its current doldrums. So far in the current crop, Brazilian center-south mills are producing 16 percent more sugar than they did last year and 4 percent less ethanol, as the prices for the sweetener have hovered near the highest levels in four years. Marcio Felix, the Energy Ministry's head of biofuels, said the RenovaBio program has some clear objectives. "One of them is to expand ethanol use in line with Brazil's climate pledge in Paris." Considering Brazil's commitments to the pact, the use of ethanol should increase from 28 billion liters per year in 2015 to around 50 billion liters by 2030. But in the last year use of the biofuel dropped, since prices were not as attractive compared to those of gasoline. Luis Henrique Guimaraes, chief executive of Raízen, the joint venture between Royal-Dutch Shell Plc and Cosan SA Industria e Comercio, said the government has reached out to him and other executives to discuss the new policy. Guimaraes believes a critical step in the new program would be to define how much more ethanol the country could realistically consume. "The government will have to use pricing mechanisms through taxes. We already have a carbon tax, which is the Cide, so it is a matter of adjusting the size of the incentive you want," he told reporters. Brazil already requires that all gasoline sold in the country contain 27 percent of anhydrous ethanol. (Reporting by Marcelo Teixeira; Editing by Reese Ewing and David Gregorio) Biofuel Organisms - Sugarcane Sugarcane is a very heavily used feedstock for biofuel. Brazil is the global leader in producing ethanol fuel from sugarcane and has been doing so since the 1970s. Sugarcane is often touted as a beneficial biofuel because it returns roughly eight times more energy than is invested into it. Despite the fact that sugarcane produces roughly twice as much ethanol per acre than corn, only 5.6 million gallons of ethanol per produced form sugarcane in 2011 compared to nearly 14 million gallons from U.S. corn. This discrepancy is due in part to the heavy subsidies on corn and the relatively larger size of United States industry. One the other hand, Brazil is the largest users of ethanol as a fuel with more than 35,000 ethanol fueling stations in the country. Ethanol makes up 50% of the fuel used in Brazil and only 10% of the fuel used in the United States. It costs less to produce as well, though U.S. tariffs keep the price higher than that of corn in the United States. Other countries, like Sweden, are actively working to reduce tariffs and increase imports of Brazilian ethanol. Biofuel Qualities and Land Use Sugarcane yields about 800 gallons of fuel per acre, making it twice as efficient as corn. To meet the fuel demands of the U.S. for a single year would require 681,000 square kilometers. Also helping its efficiency over corn is the fact that sugarcane yields sugar, which can be fermented directly. Corn produces mostly starch, which must be converted to sugar before it can be fermented to ethanol. Controversy Sugarcane has been touted by some as the answer to global biofuel needs. Unfortunately claims like “sugarcane is the most efficient biofuel feedstock in commercial use today” fail to take into account land use changes that severely damage the eco-friendly profile of sugarcane. Because the crop grows best in tropical regions, rain forest is being cleared to plant sugarcane plantations. This means massive carbon debts are incurred before any crop is ever harvested and used. More important than the carbon debt, however, is the loss of biodiversity. Rainforests are the most diverse regions of the planet and are already threatened by encroaching civilization. Further pressure may lead to irreparable harm through loss of biodiversity. The Advantages and Disadvantages of Fossil Fuels Humans have been burning fossil fuels for over a century and a half now and in that time we have become very good and finding, extracting, and refining the crude product from which these fuels are made. So, advantage number one for fossil fuels would have to be infrastructure. The knowledge to exploit these resources and the tools to make that happen are both well-defined, in place, and in use on a daily basis. Probably the most substantial benefit to come from fossil fuels is their energy density. Fossil fuels carry enough energy in a small enough space to make them very practical for a number of uses, most importantly transportation. The same cannot be said for many biofuels or for electricity, which requires large and cumbersome batteries that generally only provide a fraction of the energy density of fossil fuels. Finally, fossil fuels are inexpensive and have uses beyond their applications to energy. They offer raw material for industries ranging from plastic to pharmaceuticals to laboratory science. Their applications go well beyond energy. Of course, the disadvantages of fossil fuels are well known. They are in limited supply, which means sooner or later we will run low and prices will begin to climb. Eventually they will disappear altogether. Even if this problem could be addressed, it would not eliminate the huge environmental impacts that fossil fuels have, including everything from oil spills to global warming to acid rain. The best way to view fossil fuel energy is as the source that brought humanity into the twentyfirst century. They aren’t 'evil' but it is time for society to transition to alternatives for the sake of the environment and because, eventually, the current source of our energy will run dry. These are just some of the reasons humans have turned to biofuels. Availability of Biofuels Unlike fossil fuels, biofuels are a renewable energy source. Because they are derived from crops that can be harvested annually, or in the case of algae monthly, biofuels are theoretically unlimited. Despite this surface appearance of unlimited availability, biofuels do have restrictions. Restrictions are treated in more depth in disadvantages of biofuels, but a brief consideration reveals that the threat to the food supply is the major limiting factor to the quantity of biofuel feedstock can be grown. This limitation also means that certain feedstocks are out of the running for replacing fossil fuels. Crops like corn and soybeans do not produce enough energy per acre of crop to meet current fuel needs, which are only expected to increase, without seriously threatening the food supply. For this reason, higher energy density crops like algae and Jatropha are being considered. An abstraction of availability is delivery infrastructure. After all, a fuel that it easily produced but not easily transported (like electricity from solar panels in the Sahara) is still limited in its availability. Biofuels are similar in many ways to fossil fuels. They are liquid at standard temperature and pressure, have reasonably high energy densities, and can be distributed with only minor modifications to existing infrastructure. Speaking of modifications, biofuels have the advantage that they can be burned in standard internal combustion engines with only minor modifications to the rubber in fuel lines and gaskets. This is in stark contrast to fuels like hydrogen or electricity, which requires complete redesign of everything from the engine to the transmission. So, in terms of availability, biofuels have a big advantage as they are at the top of the list of alternatives and, as supplies slowly dwindle, will also top fossil fuels. Availability may be the driving force in adoption of alternatives energies, making biofuels the next logical choice while other alternatives are still under development. In fact, biofuels are already showing up in full fuel engines, in countries like Brazil, and as additives to standard fossil fuels in almost every nation. The transition is likely to be subtle but slow as more and more fossil fuel is replaced with biofuel. The U.S. military, for instance, plans to replace 50% of its fossil-based jet fuel with biofuel alternatives by 2016. Environmental Impact This category is tricky because biofuels are very similar to hydrocarbons and have some of the same emissions problems that standard fossil fuels have. They can, however, be more environmentally friendly if care is taken in how they are produced and distributed. It is also the case that biofuels have an impact on the environment other than emissions, so we must consider several different subcategories under this heading. Spills and Surface Contamination Biofuels are not 100% safe but they are much safer than fossil fuels. If you were to spill a large quantity of biofuel into a concentrated area, it would likely kill living organisms and contaminate surround soil or water. However, the scale of the impact would be orders of magnitude smaller than with fossil fuels. First off, biofuels are biological molecules and this means they are biodegradable. Bacteria and other organisms that live naturally in the soil and water are able to use biofuel molecules as energy sources and break them down into harmless byproducts. This means that even though concentrated biofuel spills can kill things like plants and smaller animals, they will not persist in the environment and cause damage or make an area uninhabitable for long periods of time. Sulphur and Atmospheric Contamination One of the major problems to arise from burning fossil fuels, especially coal, is acid rain that comes from the high sulphur content of these fuels. Biofuels can be produced in ways that completely eliminate sulphur and thus can eliminate this component of acid rain. On the other hand, biofuels tend to contain high levels of nitrogen, which can form compounds that also lead to acid rain and atmospheric contamination. On the whole, the net impact on acid rain production is usually negative, meaning biofuels can reduce acid rain. Importantly, biofuels can be carefully produced to ensure that contamination is as low as possible, giving them an edge over fossil fuels because it is easier to avoid contamination in the production phase than it is to remove contaminants during refining. Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions and Global Warming This is the area in which the most care must be taken in how biofuels are produced. If biofuels are produced in the “correct” way, they can greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. If produced incorrectly, they can increase emissions. Here is how. First, plants use carbon dioxide, the major greenhouse gas of concern, to grow and produce food. So, plants are able to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and thus decrease global warming. Biofuels, when grown from plants, can thus offset their CO2 admissions because they take up the gas during growth that is produced when the fuel is burned. The idea is that if there is a one-to-one relationship, then the gas produced is the same as the gas taken in and there is no net impact on global warming. The problem is that achieving the one-to-one ratio may be impossible. For starters, energy has to be invested into growing the crop itself. This energy comes in the form of planting seeds, tilling and preparing the ground, and importing water and nutrients. As it turns out, you cannot get something for nothing and so many crops require more energy input than they give out in the end. In other words, if you take into account the GHG emissions that occur just to grow the crop and add that to the greenhouse gas emissions from burning the crop, there is more CO2 produced than taken up and global warming worsens. As of yet, there is no good solution to this problem. Many companies are looking to invest energy in the form of sunlight so that there is no GHG emitted during the production phase. There is still a net energy INPUT, but no greenhouse gas is produced. This seems to be most feasible with algae. The other problem to consider is land use. If land is cleared to grow a biofuel, then the plant life that existed there is eliminated. This problem is considered in more detail in the disadvantages of biofuel, but the main point is that carbon is produced to clear that land and the benefits of the plants on the land are lost. By some estimates and depending on the type of plant life removed, the impact could be a carbon debt that can take as long as 500 years to pay back. Again, the solution to this problem may be algae. If the above technical impediments can be overcome, then the net impact of biofuels on the environment can be limited. In such a scenario, the greenhouse gas emissions and impact on global warming will be far lower with biofuels than with fossil fuels. The feasibility of achieving this advantage remains to be seen. Energy Independence This advantage is obvious and has no immediate drawbacks. If a country has the land resources to grow biofuel feedstock, then it can produce its own energy. This ends any dependence on fossil fuel resources, which are geographically limited to only a few places in the world. Given the amount of conflict that occurs over fuel supplies and prices, energy independence should have a net positive effect. Despite this utopian ideal, the reality of biofuel energy independence is not so clear cut. First, not every country has the resources needed to grow biofuels. Many countries do not have the land area, access to water, or ability to produce fertilizer for crops and thus would still need to rely on others for their fuel to some degree. As a second point, the shift in power could have a highly disruptive effect. First, national economies around the world depend on oil revenue to survive. Many Middle Eastern countries have a vested interest in ensuring that oil remains important and profitable given that as much as 90% of government revenue in these places comes from oil exports. To compound this problem, most of these countries would go from net energy exporters to net energy importers, further damaging their economies and forcing them to completely shift their industrial and commercial focuses. Biological Carbon Fixation Carbon fixation is a process that takes inorganic carbon (in the form of things like CO2) and converts it into organic compounds. In other words, any process that converts carbon dioxide into a molecule that would be found in a living organism is carbon fixation. If this process occurs in a living organism, it is referred to as 'biological carbon fixation'. Fuel The next part of the definition of a biofuel involves fuel. A fuel is nothing more than something from which we humans can get energy. Carbon fixation can lead to a number of different compounds, like proteins, fats, and alcohols (just to name a few). If any of those molecules can be used to provide energy in a mechanical setting, we call it a fuel. The Real Definition of a Biofuel and the Practical Definition A biofuel is a hydrocarbon that is made BY or FROM a living organism that we humans can use to power something. This definition of a biofuel is rather formal. In practical consideration, any hydrocarbon fuel that is produced from organic matter (living or once living material) in a short period of time (days, weeks, or even months) is considered a biofuel. This contrasts with fossil fuels, which take millions of years to form and with other types of fuel which are not based on hydrocarbons (nuclear fission, for instance). What makes biofuels tricky to understand is that they need not be made by a living organism, though they can be. Biofuels can also be made through chemical reactions, carried out in a laboratory or industrial setting, that use organic matter (called biomass) to make fuel. The only real requirements for a biofuel are that the starting material must be CO2 that was fixed (turned into another molecule) by a living organism and the final fuel product must be produced quickly and not over millions of years. Biomass Biomass is simply organic matter. In others words, it is dead material that was once living. Kernels of corn, mats of algae, and stalks of sugar cane are all biomass. Before global warming related to burning fossil fuels became a major factor in determining where energy came from, the major concern was that fossil fuels, which are considered limited in supply, would run out over the next century. It was thought that if we could produce hydrocarbons another way, and quickly, then we could meet our energy demands without much problem. This leads to one of the major separating factors between a biofuel and a fossil fuel - renewability. Biomass power plant A fossil fuel is not considered renewable because it takes millions of years to form and humans really can’t wait that long. Biofuel, on the other hand, comes from biomass, which can be produced year after year through sustainable farming practices. This means biomass and biofuel are renewable (we can replace used biofuel over a very short period of time). It is important to note that 'renewable' energy is not the same thing as 'green' energy. Renewable energy simply won’t run out any time soon, like biofuels, hydroelectric, wind, and solar. A “green” energy is one that is also good for the planet because it does not harm ecosystems, contribute to acid rain, or worsen global warming. Solar energy is a 'green' energy. All 'green' energy is considered renewable, but not all renewable energy is green. Biofuels are examples of renewable energy sources that aren’t always green because they produce greenhouse gases. Types of Biofuels The chemical structure of biofuels can differ in the same way that the chemical structure of fossil fuels can differ. For the most part, our interest is in liquid biofuels as they are easy to transport. The table below compares various biofuels with their fossil fuel counterparts. The chart above is only a limited list of the biofuels available, covering only the most popular and widely used. It is worth nothing that ethanol is found in almost all gasoline mixtures. In Brazil, gasoline contains at least 95% ethanol. In other countries, ethanol usually makes up between 10 and 15% of gasoline. Biofuel versus Fossil Fuel Biofuels are not new. In fact, Henry Ford had originally designed his Model T to run on ethanol. There are several factors that decide the balance between biofuel and fossil fuel use around the world. Those factors are cost, availability, and food supply. All three factors listed above are actually interrelated. To begin, the availability of fossil fuels has been of concern almost from day one of their discovery. Pumping fuel from the ground is a difficult and expensive process, which adds greatly to the cost of these fuels. Additionally, fossil fuels are not renewable, which means they will run out at some point. As our ability to pump fossil fuels from the ground diminishes, the available supply will decrease, which will inevitably lead to an increase in price. It was originally thought that biofuels could be produced in almost limitless quantity because they are renewable. Unfortunately, our energy needs far out-pace our ability to grown biomass to make biofuels for one simple reason, land area. There is only so much land fit for farming in the world and growing biofuels necessarily detracts from the process of growing food. As the population grows, our demands for both energy and food grow. At this point, we do not have enough land to grow both enough biofuel and enough food to meet both needs. The result of this limit has an impact on both the cost of biofuel and the cost of food. For wealthier countries, the cost of food is less of an issue. However, for poorer nations, the use of land for biofuels, which drives up the cost of food, can have a tremendous impact. The balance between food and biofuel is what keeps the relatively simple process of growing and making biofuels from being substantially cheaper than fossil fuel. When this factor is combined with an increased ability (thanks to advances in technology) to extract oil from the ground, the price of fossil fuel is actually lower than that of biofuel for the most part. The Carbon Equation: Would Biofuels Contribute to Global Warming? Assuming we can overcome the problem of biofuels interrupting the food supply (such as growing algae in the ocean), can we overcome the problem of biofuels contributing to global warming? The answer, surprisingly, may be yes. It is true that biofuels produce carbon dioxide, which is a potent greenhouse gas and the one most often blamed for global warming. However, it is also true that growing plants consumes carbon dioxide. Thus, the equation becomes a simple balancing act. If the plants we grow utilize the same amount of carbon dioxide that we produce, then we will have a net increase of zero and no global warming. How realistic is this view? It may seem like a simple matter to only produce as much carbon dioxide as plants use. After all, couldn’t we only burn biofuels and thus keep the equation balanced? Well, the math actually doesn’t quite add up. Research has shown that energy must be invested into producing crops and converting them into biofuels before any energy is obtained. A 2005 study from Cornell University found that producing ethanol from corn used almost 30% more energy than it produced. In other words, you can’t produce a perpetual motion machine using biofuels because you lose the energy you invest in creating them in the first place. In fact, you can’t even break even. The other problem that we run into with biofuels is that carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas we have to worry about. Other chemicals, like nitrous oxide, are also greenhouse gases and growing plants using fertilizer produces a lot of nitrous oxide. Basically, fertilizer contains nitrogen, which plants need to grow. However, most plants cannot convert molecular nitrogen into the elemental nitrogen they need. For this process, plants rely on bacteria. As it turns out, bacteria not only produce nitrogen that plants can use, they also produce nitrogen products like nitrous oxide, and probably more than was previously thought. The net result is that we may be balancing the CO2 equation by using biofuels, but we are unbalancing the N2O part of the equation and still causing global warming. The Future of Biofuel A decade ago, subsidies for biofuel growth and development in many countries (especially the U.S.) were high. However, better understanding of global warming, increased awareness of the fragility of the food supply, and a general trend toward “greener” alternatives have all led to a decline in the popularity of biofuels. In 2011, The U.S. Senate voted 73 to 27 to end tax credits and trade protections for corn-based ethanol production. As the second largest producer of ethanol, this is a substantial move that reflects the changing pressures on our energy needs and shifted focus to environmentally friendly energy sources. Biodiversity and Biofuels There is one last problem presented by biofuels that needs to be addressed: biodiversity. Biodiversity refers to the variety of different living things in an environment. For instance, if you grow only sweet corn in a field, you have low biodiversity. If, however, you grow sweet corn, dent corn, flint corn, flour corn, and popcorn, then you have high biodiversity. Why should we care? Growing a single type of corn is easier for producing biofuels because we can select that type that yields the best raw product, is easiest to grow, and which requires the least amount of water and other resources. This sounds great, but then down side to this is that pests that eat this type of corn will begin to proliferate. What is worse, if we spray with pesticide to kill these pests, some will inevitably be resistant to the pesticide. Over time, these pests will grow in number and we will be left with pests that are resistant to our chemical defences. In the end, we have a bigger problem that what we started with and probably no corn because the new “super pest” ate it all. Growing addiction In Brazil, ethanol from sugar cane now accounts for about 40% of the fuel in the country's vehicles. In the United States, a relatively cheap blend of fuel, called E85 after its 85% ethanol content, is enjoying a growing popularity. And on 28 June, the US Senate passed an energy bill that requires gasoline suppliers to add 8 billion gallons of ethanol a year to their fuel by 2012, rising from the current consumption of 3 billion gallons. But Vaughan's team argues this increase is bad news for the environment, given the way that crops are currently grown. When the sugar-cane fields are burned, which is done to make harvesting easier, the fires can spread to nearby native vegetation, explains Dias de Oliveira. The energy needed to generate and transport plant fertilizer leads to significant carbon dioxide emissions, and cleaning the sugar cane also consumes vast quantities of water, he adds. "In a visit to one of the distilleries I observed about 3,900 litres of water being used per ton of sugarcane," he says. This drain coincides with the dry season, contributing to water shortages and damaging river life, the authors argue in the journalBioScience1. Ethanol production Ethanol's reputation as an environmentally friendly fuel is overblown, say researchers who claim that large-scale farming of sugar cane or corn for alcohol is damaging the planet. Ethanol is fermented from plant sugars and added to gasoline to boost the oxygen content of car fuels and reduce pollution. Its use is on the rise, particularly in Brazil and the United States. Its proponents argue that using it helps to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, which may lessen global warming. Although ethanol burns just like gasoline, the carbon it releases is absorbed by the plants that will make the next lot of fuel. This means that only a small amount of carbon dioxide (from transport and processing) stays in the atmosphere. But Burton Vaughan, a biologist at Washington State University, Richland, says that supporters may be ignoring ethanol's other environmental impacts. Vaughan and his colleagues, Marcelo Dias de Oliveira and Edward Rykiel, say that producing ethanol-rich fuels tends to reduce biodiversity and increase soil erosion because of the way that sugar cane is grown. DISTILLATION The impure/crude ethanol is heated in a ‘still’ until it vaporises and rises into the neck where it cools and condenses back to pure liquid ethanol. The impurities are left behind in the still. The ethanol trickles down the condensing tube into a barrel, ready for distribution. Ethanol can be used as a fuel for cars and lorries, heating homes etc........ When burned it produces fewer pollutants than traditional fuels such as petrol and diesel. Biodiversity is important to ensuring that pests do not grow out of control. The type of farming needed to produce large quantities of biofuels is generally not amendable to high levels of biodiversity. This presents a fundamental problem in producing biofuels that is enhanced by the fact that “super pests” produced in the effort to grow biofuels can also threaten food crops. Bioethanol Bioethanol is an alcohol made by fermenting the sugar components of biomass. Nowadays, it is made mostly from sugar and starch crops. Due to advanced technology being developed by the Biomass Program, cellulosic biomass, like trees and grasses, are also used as an fuel for cars in its pure form, but it is usually used as a gasoline additive to increase octane and improve vehicle emissions. Bioethanol production is highly associated with fermentation - a series of chemical reactions that convert sugars to ethanol. The fermentation reaction is caused by yeast or bacteria, which feed on the sugars. Ethanol and carbon dioxide are produced as the sugar is consumed. The simplified fermentation reaction equation for the 6-carbon sugar, glucose, is: C6H12O6 (glucose) → 2 CH3CH2OH (ethanol) + 2 CO2 (carbon dioxide) The basic processes for converting sugar and starch crops are well-known and widely used commercially today. While these types of plants generally have a greater value as food sources than as fuel sources there are some exceptions to this. For example, Brazil uses its huge crops of sugar cane to produce fuel for its transportation needs. [2] Now, we shall analyze the advantages and disadvantages of ethanol use as a source of energy. Brazil and Ethanol: Advantages The advantages of ethanol use for energy production in Brazil are diverse. The most important and widespread by the media is definitely the reduction of emissions: environmental officials estimate the use of sugarcane ethanol in Brazil has reduced the country's greenhouse gas emissions by 600 million metric tons of carbon dioxide since 1975. Furthermore, one can also take into account the prospective economic growth that Brazil can have due this source of energy: economists estimate that Brazil's total economic output is 35% higher today than it would be had it been without the country's focus on diverse energy production from offshore oil to sugarcane ethanol production. Brazil and Ethanol: Disadvantages Even though sugar cane production is concentrated mainly in two geographic regions of Brazil, the Northeast and the Southeast, dramatic land use changes have been evident in both those regions since the establishment of Proalcool - which can be described as a program that stimulates the production of alcohol as an energy source in Brazil. Less than 1% of Brazil's total territory would be needed to reach production of 30 billion liters of alcohol per year. Nevertheless, the area in which sugar cane production is most concentrated has been subjected to the negative effects of a large monoculture crop. A monoculture is the growing of only one species of crop, grown densely over a large land area. As such, monocultures require increased use of pesticides, since the area would be an ideal location for crop pests and diseases to grow. Furthermore, it requires vast areas of land, and therefore can lead to the destruction of natural habitats. By allowing very fertile agriculture production areas, such as Sao Paulo, to be devoted to sugar cane necessarily drove other crops out of the area, driving up the price of traditional food crops. Thus, not only are traditional food crops forced to move to other areas, the price of land surrounding sugar cane plantations has seen a dramatic increase since the creation of Proalcool. Furthermore, the practice of subsidizing one primary crop for ethanol production, especially a crop that is dominated by a relatively few large-scale farmers, implies the denial of similar subsidies to other crops or producers. Ethanol: Politics/Economics As one can see there are many advantages and disadvantages to the use of ethanol as an energy source. Thus, one might wonder what is the political and economical take on the subject. As described before Proalcool (Programa Nacional do Alcool) was created in 1973 at a time of great flux in the international sugar industry. The oil crisis of 1973 had sent gasoline prices soaring internationally and the Brazilian government decided to look to possible domestic sources of fuel production in order to insulate itself from the chaotic market. The program was aimed at bolstering Brazil's national sugar economy by safeguarding the privately owned sugar industry. The Proalcool mandate was simple enough to implement as alcohol plants already in operation required only simple modifications to produce ethanol. Proalcool's specific mandate was to produce 3.5 billion liters of ethanol from sugar cane by 1980. For comparisons sake: in the year before Proalcool was initiated, 1974, the nation had 130 ethanol distilleries, which produced 625 million liters of ethanol from sugar cane. [4] In the first years after the creation of Proalcool, sugar prices were stabilized as many existing sugar plants expanded or constructed alcohol fermentation and distillation processes, turning millions of tons of surplus sugar into ethanol. Even though at the inception of Proalcool the Brazilian sugar industry was the largest in the world, the continued mandate to increase production of ethanol required substantial subsidies for farmers and producers. However, nowadays with the prospect of large amount the of oil in the Brazilian pre-salt layer that would eventually raise Brazil's oil stock to the greatest in the world, the excitement regarding ethanol based energy has substantially decreased. Furthermore, due production shortfalls Brazil has had to import unprecedented volumes of the biofuel. The country reportedly imported an estimated 80 to 200 million liters (21.1 to 52.9 million gallons) of ethanol during the first quarter of 2011. Future of Ethanol Thus, given its environmental benefits, sugar-based ethanol has the potential to be a global industry. But while Brazil exports 70% of its sugar production, 75% of its ethanol output is still sold at home. That can be explained mainly because the United States and Europe see ethanol as an agricultural commodity and protect their own producers (mainly of corn ethanol). Furthermore, the world market for Brazilian ethanol will grow and that the sugar industry can triple its electricity co-generation capacity to 15,000MW (around 27% of Brazil's demand today) from its present acreage of cane. However, due to more economically viable and stable forms of energy, sugar canes have not such a sweet perspective as a form of energy in the foreseeable future. Cibele Montez Halasz. The author grants permission to copy, distribute and display this work in unaltered form, with attribution to the author, for noncommercial purposes only. All other rights, including commercial rights, are reserved to the author. Brazil is an anomaly in a global economy fueled by petroleum, having effectively weaned itself off of foreign oil imports by 2006, in part due to the development of its ethanol industry, beginning in the 1970s. While much attention has been paid to Brazil’s energy model, no other country has yet been able to replicate it. “Brazil is unique,” said Terry McInturff, director of the Energy Commerce Program at Texas Tech University. “Ethanol is very much a niche there because of the geography and climate. It’s a huge country with ideal growing conditions for sugarcane,” the main crop from which most Brazilian ethanol is derived. Nevertheless, Brazil’s ethanol industry continues to be an important driver of economic growth and represents an innovative solution to mitigate the problem of increasingly scarce fossil fuels. The impetus for developing ethanol in Brazil began with the 1973 oil crisis, when the price of crude oil quadrupled within a year. Brazil, which imported 80 percent of its oil at the time, realized it had a plentiful domestic source of energy in sugarcane, a staple of its economy for centuries. The Brazilian government began to invest heavily in ethanol production, as well as developing the infrastructure to make it economically viable. This involved government mandates on production levels, expansion of sugarcane cultivation and ethanol distilleries, and encouraging the sale of vehicles that could run on ethanol. Combined with a significant increase in domestic oil production and renewable energy sources such as hydroelectric power, Brazil’s ethanol industry helped to free the country from the vicissitudes of global oil markets. “Ethanol … highlights a technologically innovative aspect of Brazil,” said Gail Triner, Brazil Institute fellow at the Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. “It’s been quite beneficial,” she added. “Energy supply has been a major bottleneck for economic growth there.” At the same time, the ethanol industry has not been without its drawbacks. For one, it competes directly with sugar production, a major export commodity. When global prices for sugar rise, sugarcane farmers prefer to sell their crops for processing as a sugar export rather than for ethanol, forcing the government to increase subsidies to the industry to maintain production levels. In 1988, sugar prices rose to the point that the Brazilian government could no longer maintain subsidies to the industry, and it had to import ethanol until 1996. The industry eventually recovered when oil prices spiked in the late 1990s and demand for domestic ethanol in Brazil was renewed. The Brazilians have since aimed to strike an equilibrium between the sugar and ethanol industries, producing more ethanol in times of low sugar demand and vice versa. Still, Triner said there are additional tradeoffs that have yet to be fully quantified. “Under no circumstances can anyone say that sugarcane production is environmentally friendly, and the working conditions at these plantations have been a contentious issue as well,” she said. As energy demands increase with economic growth, Brazil has also expanded sugar cane cultivation into ecologically sensitive areas, such as the Amazon rainforest, often displacing indigenous peoples at the same time. Ethanol may not be sustainable option for energy independence in the long run, but it has certainly has gotten Brazil a lot farther than importing oil did, and may get it far along to the next step. Steps for producing ethonal Obtain legal authorization to produce ethanol. If you intend to produce ethanol fuel in the United States, complete and submit the following form to the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB): If you intend to produce ethanol fuel elsewhere, request proper instructions on how to legally produce ethanol fuel from the government agency that deals with such issues in your area. Confirm that you are legally authorized to produce ethanol fuel before continuing. Add fruit to a barrel. Obtain throwaway fruit from your local grocer or another source. Fruit that is rotten may be used in lieu of edible food. Add fruit until the barrel is approximately 1/3 full. It is important to not exceed this amount, as the barrel may overflow during fermentation. Mash the fruit with a pole or other blunt object. Add water and yeast to the barrel. Although standard yeast can be used, it is best to use ethanol tolerant yeast from a wine-making supply store. Add 1 to 2 packets to the barrel. Cover the barrel. Monitor the sugar content of the barrel. Check the sugar content daily with a hydrometer. Over the course of approximately 10 days, the sugar content should reduce gradually until none is left. Distill the mixture by using a reflux still, this can be purchased on the Internet. Do this immediately after the sugar is gone from the mixture. Not doing so could allow materials to develop that could ruin your engine. Put the mixture into a reflux still. Follow the manufacturer's instructions to complete the distillation process. Filter the mixture. The ethanol that you are left with after the distillation process will still have a minor impurity of water inside of it. To remove this water, you need to use a specialized fuel filter that can filter the water out. These filters are made out of specially-designed fabrics that allow ethanol molecules to pass through while trapping the water. Add gasoline (petrol) to the ethanol (optional). Depending on your engine type and regulations that apply to ethanol production in your area, add the required amount of gasoline (petrol) to the mixture. A fuel that is commonly produced is E85, which is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline (petrol). Biofuels: A Conclusion We will explore biofuels in more depth. For now, keep an open mind and consider that there is no magic bullet when it comes to meeting our energy needs. For now, good energy policies should include being observant, being patient, avoid knee-jerk reactions, and (most importantly) relying on good science to guide our decisions. .