Biofuels and Rural Poverty

Joy Clancy

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• eBook ISBN: 9781136469299
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Biological Sciences
• Subtopic: Ecology
• Index: Biological Sciences

Biofuels and Rural Poverty makes an original contribution to the current controversial global debate on biofuels, in particular the consequences that large-scale production of transport fuel substitutes can have on rural areas, principally in developing countries but also in some poor rural areas of developed countries.

Three key concerns are examined from a North-South perspective: ecological issues (related to land use and biodiversity), pro-poor policies (related to food and land security, gender and income generation) and equity of benefits within the global value chain. Can biofuels be pro-poor? Can smallholder farmers be equitably integrated in the biofuels global supply chain? Is the biofuels production chain detrimental to biodiversity?

Most other books available on biofuels take a technical approach and are aimed at addressing energy security or climate change issues. This title focuses on the socio-economic impacts on rural people's livelihoods, offering a unique perspective on the potential role of biofuels in reducing rural poverty.

1 Introduction

Biofuels,¹ the liquid fuels derived from plant material (biomass), have long been considered as an attractive substitute for petroleum fuels because they have similar combustion properties and work in existing technology. They can be assimilated into the petroleum fuels supply chain with minimal technical adjustments. Biofuels can be produced, with current commercial technology and feedstocks, on a scale commensurate with the volumes of petrol (gasoline) and diesel for transport. In a number of locations biofuels are already well-established commercial products. Brazil, which has used bioethanol intermittently as part of its fuel supply since the late 1920s, is probably the most well known. In the 1970s there was considerable interest in biofuels in response to the oil crises of 1973 and 1978/9. A few countries² began biofuel programmes which had all but disappeared when cheap oil returned in the late 1980s. However, since the turn of the millennium, a number of factors have combined to stimulate interest in biofuel production once more. These drivers can be put into two categories. One category with a strong Northern³ agenda is linked to energy security, high oil prices and environmental concerns. The second category, with an ostensibly Southern agenda, is one in which actors see biofuel production as a key means of promoting rural development (see for example UNDP, 1995; Kammen et al., 2001). The two agendas are linked and there is some crossover, in the sense that Southern governments are also concerned about high oil prices and Northern governments have to take their powerful farming lobbies into account.

This chapter starts by briefly describing how biofuels are produced and their main uses. It then returns to the issues referred to in the previous paragraph and reviews the arguments for and against biofuels. It finishes by setting the scene for the issues discussed in this book.

Biofuels: a brief introduction

The most well-known biofuels are bioethanol (a petrol substitute) and biodiesel (which substitutes for diesel). Their method of production is from well-established commercial processes and crops using what are called ‘first generation technologies and feedstocks’ that include sugar crops such as sugarcane, sugar beets and sweet sorghum, and starch crops such as maize, wheat, barley, cassava and sorghum grain for bioethanol; and oilseed crops such as rape-seed, soybeans, palm oil, sunflower and mustard seed for biodiesel. There is increasing interest in what are known as ‘second generation feedstocks’ based on cellulosic biomass, such as perennial woody plants and grasses. All of the plant growth can be converted into biofuels, whereas for first generation feedstocks only a fraction of the plant material forms a fuel feedstock. Second generation feedstocks are, therefore, considered more efficient since they give a higher yield of biofuel per hectare compared to first generation feedstocks. However, the technology is not as readily available for second generation feedstocks as it is for first. There is now also an interest in ‘third generation feedstocks’ that are derived from aquatic organisms such as algae. The interest in aquatic organisms is being driven by concerns that there is insufficient land to produce biofuels. However, there is little practical experience with ‘farming’ such organic material so these feedstocks represent a long-term development.

In this book we will concentrate on first generation biofuels, since these are already well established in the South.

Bioethanol

Overview of production process

Bioethanol is produced as a by-product of a naturally occurring fermentation reaction when yeasts break down sugars. The result is a weak solution of ethanol (5 to 15 per cent by volume). For use as an engine fuel, the solution has to be concentrated to at least 95 per cent if the bioethanol is to be used as the sole fuel. If the bioethanol is to be blended with petrol, to make the mixture known as gasohol, all water must be removed. This concentration process uses the well-established chemical engineering technique of distillation. Indeed, ethanol fermentation and distillation to produce potable alcohol are considered to be among the oldest chemical engineering processes known to man.

The aqueous residue after fermentation and distillation, known as stillage, represents a significant disposal problem both in terms of volume and composition. The volume of stillage⁴ produced is 10 to 15 times the volume of bioethanol (Kojima and Johnson, 2005). Direct discharge of the stillage into natural waterways can cause serious environmental damage since the stillage is high in nutrients and can lead to eutrophication. Not only is this an ecological disaster but there are also social-economic consequences. Families who live along waterways and depend on fish and other aquatic plants and animals for food are deprived of important resources as well as a source of commodities. There are alternative uses for the stillage, such as a fertiliser, animal feed or converting it to a combustible gas⁵ which can be used to fuel the distillation process. In Brazil, using the stillage as fertiliser has become common practice and there is evidence to suggest that there are productivity increases of up to one tonne of sugar per hectare (Moreira and Goldemberg, 1999).⁶ The stillage is high in potassium which reduces the need for expensive fertiliser inputs (Zandbergen, 1993).

Feedstocks

Any plant material containing significant amounts of sugar, or materials that can be converted into sugar such as starch or cellulose, can be used to produce bioethanol. The three main sugar-containing crops which could be grown directly for bioethanol are: sugarcane, sugar beet and sweet sorghum. While the first two are extensively grown commercially as feedstocks for sugar and bioethanol, the latter tends to be a subsistence crop. Sweet sorghum has attracted significant attention, especially when the inclusion of smallholders in production chains is an objective because it is a multipurpose crop, it has high drought tolerance and its cultivation techniques are well known to small-scale farmers particularly in semi-arid areas of Africa where grain sorghum (a relative of sweet sorghum) is extensively grown (ICRISAT, 2007). A number of by-products and agricultural processing residues with a high sugar content, such as molasses, fruit wastes and whey, could also be fermented, which would simultaneously act as a waste treatment process. Indeed molasses is already fermented commercially to produce both potable and bioethanol (Rajagopal and Zilberman, 2007) as are wine residues in the European Union (EU) (CFC, 2007). In 2003, around 60 per cent of bioethanol came from sugarcane, sugar beet and molasses (Kojima and Johnson, 2005).

The sugars in starch crops are in macro-molecular form, as carbohydrates, which are not directly fermentable by yeast. The feedstock, therefore, has to undergo pre-treatment to release the sugars. This adds to the costs of production.⁷ The starch sources that are used for producing potable and bioethanol include grains, such as maize (corn), wheat, rice, barley, rye and grain sorghum, cassava (manioc or tapioca) and sweet potato. Other carbohydrate sources that have been considered include potatoes, Jerusalem artichokes and cacti (such as agave).⁸ There has been considerable concern expressed about the use of starch crops as feedstocks for bioethanol since they form the staple food for many of the world’s poorest people. The issue of food security is discussed briefly later in this chapter and more extensively in Chapter 5.

A technical solution to address the concerns of using food crops as a fuel feedstock is to use cellulose, the most abundant organic material on earth.⁹ About 90 per cent of cellulose is found in trees, together with two other macro-molecules: hemicelluloses and lignin. All three compounds can be broken down to yield fermentable sugars. The process is much more complicated than for the other two groups of feedstocks, and at the time of writing it is not yet a commercially mature technology, other than the extraction of cellulose from wood for paper making. However, since the cellulose content of biomass is only between 40 and 50 per cent by mass (Worldwatch Institute, 2007: 46), a large part of the biomass would go unconverted, which would considerably affect the economics of bioethanol production. Therefore, considerable research and development are needed to find low cost chemical or biological methods to render the whole feedstock in a form more amenable to further processing.¹⁰

A mixture of cellulosic waste material, such as paper, cardboard and fabrics is found in municipal solid waste which makes this a potentially attractive feedstock source. In high income countries of the North, paper makes up around 36 per cent of the weight of municipal solid waste whereas in many countries of the South the percentage is much lower (Twardowska et al., 2004). Agricultural residues are also largely composed of cellulose and to the outsider they can appear a waste waiting to be converted into a valuable resource. However, many residues have important uses for rural communities, for example, in soil fertility and stability conservation, as roofing material and cattle feed. There are some residues, for example, cotton stalk, which are burnt as part of disease control and hence could be considered as non-competitive feedstock. The use of such residues, therefore, needs careful analysis on a site specific basis. There are also ecological concerns raised about the planting of extensive monocultures of trees or perennial herbaceous grasses for cellulose production (Worldwatch Institute, 2007) (see Chapter 4).

Bioethanol as a fuel

The main use for bioethanol is as a transport fuel (see Chapter 6 for other uses). Bioethanol can be used alone or blended with petrol (gasohol) in a slightly modified spark ignition engine. Indeed, Otto, the inventor of the four-stroke spark ignition engine, used ethanol as a fuel in his early engine tests (Clancy, 1991). A litre of ethanol contains approximately 33 per cent less energy than a litre of petrol, meaning that to travel the same distance more litres of bioethanol than litres of petrol are needed. However, ethanol is a cleaner-burning fuel than petrol in terms of particulates, carbon monoxide and carcinogens. Although there can be a slightly higher level produced of nitrogen oxides, the gases linked to acid rain and a precursor of ground-level ozone, better known as smog – a form of urban air pollution which causes respiratory problems (EPA, 1999). Gasohol has better fuel properties than pure petrol.

The percentage of ethanol in gasohol varies from 5 to 25 per cent, with 10 per cent appearing to be the most commonly used (Worldwatch Institute, 2007). In this range, car engines only need slight modification and users in colder climates do not experience starting problems. In Brazil, there are cars which run on pure bioethanol and flex-fuel vehicles which run on any mixture of a gasoline-ethanol blend and hydrous ethanol. Car manufacturers have been able to benefit from Brazil’s long experience with using bioethanol and have adapted cars to be able to operate on gasohol.

Biodiesel

Overview of the production process

Biodiesel is derived primarily from plant oils. Biodiesel production involves first crushing the seeds to extract the oils which then undergo a chemical reaction with an alcohol (methanol or ethanol) to yield esters. These esters form biodiesel. The ester from methanol is the most commonly used; not only is it cheaper to produce than the ethyl ester, but it is also easier to separate from the by-products. The prefix ‘bio’ is slightly misleading if it is meant to imply ‘renewable’ or ‘green’ since both the methanol and ethanol are derived from fossil fuels. However, it is reported that Brazil is experimenting with sugarcane-derived ethanol, so that the biodiesel can be considered renewable (Kojima and Johnson, 2005).

The by-product of the ester formation is glycerine which has a commercial value as a precursor for a number of products such as pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, toothpaste and paints. The residue from crushing the seeds can be sold as animal feed.

Feedstocks

A wide variety of oils and fats can be used to make biodiesel. A major distinction is between edible and non-edible oils. Currently, three edible oils dominate as biodiesel feedstocks: rapeseed, sunflower and soybean. In Europe, biodiesel derived from rapeseed oil has dominated, while in the US, it has been soybean oil. At the time of writing, 57 per cent of global oilseed production comes from soybean; however, only a small portion (less than 6 per cent) of the soybean global production is used for biodiesel (Worldwatch Institute, 2007). Soy is grown as a highly mechanised large-scale production system.

The oilseed considered as a biodiesel feedstock tends to reflect a country’s commercial agriculture, for example, palm oil in Malaysia and Indonesia. An advantage of palm oil as a feedstock is the high oil yields per hectare compared to other vegetable oil crops (see Table 1.1).

The concerns expressed about using food crops as fuel feedstocks has generated interest in non-edible seeds such as Jatropha curcas and Pongamia pinnata. These plants are promoted for use in the dry and semi-arid regions of Asia and Africa. Reservations have been expressed, however, about the economic viability of these crops under conditions of low inputs and poor land quality (Rajagopal and Zilberman, 2007). China has been using 40,000 to 60,000 tonnes waste cooking oils annually to make biodiesel, while meat processing plants have been using animal fat residues to run their own vehicle fleets (Worldwatch Institute, 2007).

Table 1.1 Summary of main biofuel-producing countries, production capacity as of 2005/6, future targets and main feedstocks

Country	Biofuel and production capacity as of 2005/6	Future targets – quantity and year	Main sources for biofuel
US	18.4 billion litres of ethanol (2006), 284 million litres biodiesel (2005)	28 billion litres of ethanol by 2012 and 1 billion litres of cellulosic ethanol by 2013	maize and in future cellulosic sources
Brazil	17.5 billion litres (2006)	25% blending of ethanol (has been in effect for long time), 2.4 billion litres of biodiesel by 2013	sugarcane, soybean
EU	3.6 billion litres of biodiesel (2005), 1.6 billion litres of ethanol (2006)	5.75% of transportation fuel on energy basis by 2010	rapeseed, sunflower, wheat, sugar beet and barley
China	1.2 billion litres of ethanol (2006)	na*	maize, cassava, sugarcane
Colombia	400 million litres of ethanol (2006)	10% ethanol blending in cities exceeding 500,000 people since 2006	sugarcane, oil palm
Indonesia	340 million litres of biodiesel (2006)	10% ethanol and 10% biodiesel effective April 2006	oil palm
Malaysia	340 million litres of biodiesel (2006)	5% biodiesel from April 2006	oil palm
Thailand	330 million litres of ethanol (2006)	na*	cassava, sugarcane, molasses
Canada	240 million litres of ethanol (2006)	5% ethanol by 2010 and 2% biodiesel by 2012	maize and wheat
Arg...

Table of contents

• Front Cover
• Biofuels and Rural Poverty
• Title Page
• Copyright
• Contents
• Abbreviations
• Acknowledgements
• 1 Introduction
• 2 Energy and rural poverty
• 3 The impacts of large-scale liquid biofuel production in rural communities
• 4 Biofuel production and ecosystem services
• 5 Liquid biofuel production and rural communities’ food security
• 6 Do liquid biofuels address rural energy and poverty issues?
• 7 Can biofuels be made pro-poor?
• Notes
• References
• Index