Editor's note: This Q&A is a part of a survey conducted by Scientific American of executives at companies engaged in developing and implementing non–fossil fuel energy technologies.

What technical obstacles currently most curtail the growth of biofuels? What are the prospects for overcoming them in the near future and the longer-term?
The conversion and commercialization of cellulose inputs into fuel ethanol is a significant technology obstacle to the growth of the ethanol industry as a mainstream fuel. A number of companies are currently working on cellulosic technologies, and great strides have been made, but a gap remains between technology advances and full commercial deployment. Much of this challenge exists around two factors—scalability and cost. Science is no longer the primary gating issue—it's now a matter of investment and resource allocation.

A key issue is the conversion of existing corn ethanol and sugarcane ethanol facilities into integrated cellulose/starch/sugar production facilities. Along with the construction of new cellulose-only ethanol facilities, the conversion of existing plants would enable the production of commercial quantities of cellulosic ethanol by 2010, as mandated by the Renewable Fuel Standard.

Are there obstacles to scaling up biofuels to serve a larger national or global customer base?
In addition to capital, the availability of various renewable inputs and their transportation and storage may present a challenge for some producers, depending on their technology. AE Biofuels uses an enzyme-based approach to the production of cellulosic ethanol and has designed our process to be integrated with existing corn ethanol production, in addition to building cellulose-only plants. Existing ethanol plants already have feedstock management, distillation, ethanol distribution and other infrastructure in place.

Proximity to agricultural waste such as corn cobs, corn stalks, wheat straw and sugarcane bagasse provides the best source of lower-lignin renewable cellulosic biomass for the AE Biofuels process. Since transportation and storage of biomass add to the overall production cost if the materials aren't located near the biofuels facility, agricultural areas are the best location for renewable biomass to be used in ethanol production.

Integrating cellulose and traditional ethanol production from starch or sugarcane is the most rapidly scalable approach to the large-scale production of cellulosic ethanol.

Can the existing energy infrastructure handle growth in biofuels? Or does that, too, need further modification?
The distribution of ethanol via pipeline is a method to lower the cost of long-haul distribution compared to rail or truck transportation. However, more than 10 billion gallons of ethanol will be transported and blended in 2009, and the earlier limitations in ethanol distribution and blending are no longer the major factor in the growth of the industry.

Given the current economic crisis, can your industry get the necessary capital (from public or private sources) to adequately finance its growth?
Capital investment is the key to the large-scale commercial implementation of next-generation biofuels. Commercial debt financing is essentially nonexistent in the current marketplace, so in order for this industry to scale, a mix of sources will need to be developed in the next 18 months.

The U.S. government has a unique opportunity. In 2005 and 2007, energy legislation was passed that increased the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and also created a number of Department of Energy and U.S. Department of Agriculture funding vehicles (grants and loan guarantees) to help the biofuels industry meet mandated production goals. Most of these programs reside at the Departments of Energy and Agriculture. The pace of implementing these programs has not followed the strong policy imperative set by lawmakers.

President Obama has a unique opportunity, through executive order or directive to his cabinet, to streamline the process of getting these funds to qualified companies. Without a strong commitment from government, renewable fuels will not keep pace with our nation’s stated energy independence goals.

From a strategic standpoint, which is the bigger competitor to biofuels: incumbent coal, oil and gas technologies or other alternative energy technologies?
All of these sources of energy are complementary, not competitive. A combination of resources and technologies will have to work in conjunction to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy.

Is there a cost target that you and others in your industry are aiming to achieve in, say, five years?
By reducing the amount of food-based inputs and energy required in the production of biofuels, the overall cost of production will be reduced. Next-generation biofuels will open and expand markets for additional agricultural products (wheat, barley, staws, grasses, corn stover, woody biomass). The production of biofuels at costs that enable retail prices of fuels below the comparable price of gasoline is the overall target, and the high volatility of crude oil prices has demonstrated the urgent need for a fuel alternative.

6 Comments

1. 1. jdbapat 09:03 AM 4/20/09

   Pune
   
   Bioethanol is the answer for fossil fuels. Combine it with the fuel cell, it becomes the fuel for the power source of the future.
   Dr J D Bapat
   http://jdbapat-greenenergy.blogspot.com

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

2. 2. archwayold 11:02 AM 4/20/09

   There are thousands of ways for us to express ourselves that aren't environmentally gluttonous. Let's change our lifestyles, not our power stations.

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

3. 3. Biodiversivist 11:07 AM 4/20/09

   The author admits that food and biofuels are presently competing for arable land, unlike other groups that still promote corn ethanol and soy biodiesel. The biofuel industry would disappear a few days after government support of it ended. This chart shows the lopsided support it is receiving:
   
   http://home.comcast.net/~russ676/Graphics/img28.gif
   
   I don't see corn ethanol refiners rolling over and handing the keys to their refineries to their competitors the cellulosic refiners.
   
   Instead of spending money trying to increase the supply of liquid fuels that money should be spent finding ways to reduce use of them. Liquid fuels, regardless of what they are made from are going to grow increasingly expensive. The volatility of oil prices is nothing compared to the volatility of biofuel prices, which will also contend with weather issues.
   
   The chart below was adapted from an article on the Oil Drum blog. It shows where biofuels are heading if we don't change some of the variables used to make the chart:
   
   http://home.comcast.net/~russ676/Graphics/img29.gif
   
   In the long run, cellulosic will never compete with cane ethanol. The Cerrado is vast. Cattle will be displaced into the Amazon to compete for pasture with the palm oil for biodiesel, thus destroying the last great carbon sink on the planet:
   
   Net energy yield of biofuels:
   
   http://home.comcast.net/~russ676/Graphics/img8.gif
   
   Biodiesel yield:
   
   http://home.comcast.net/~russ676/Graphics/img10.gif
   
   Palm destroying Amazon:
   http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0323-butler-laurance_tcs.html
   
   http://www.biodiversivist.com
   

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

4. 4. pmarryann 05:06 PM 4/21/09

   I enjoyed reading this insider opinion. However, I was disappointed that the interview did not address (or not in more detail) the most vital issues concerning biofuels: the competition of biofuels and food production; the ecological consequences of reintroducing monocultures of cellulose-rich plants (including the problem of how to minimize the threats to ecosystems - i.e. rain forests - pressured by the expansion of the biofuel industry); and the risk of an atmospheric increase of nitrous oxide (a much more potent greenhouse gas than CO2 that is released by decomposing, nitrogen-rich plants such as maize).
   
   All these issues are vital when discussing the future of biofuels

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

5. 5. freeport56 08:21 PM 4/21/09

   Cattle do not exist well in the amazon. besides destroying more of the rain forest, using food crops for fuel will kill off some of the worlds populations and start regional conflicts over food prices. This we have already seen

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this

6. 6. ptran 08:52 PM 4/21/09

   Please correct me if I'm missing something, but biofuels seem to be an extremely inefficient means of harvesting solar energy. Photosynthesis is only 7% efficient, and the energy input into growing the plants and converting the plants into ethanol or biodesiel probably puts the net yield of biofuels below 1%. Compare this to solar photovoltaics. PV panels range from 10% - 40% efficient, and convert sunlight directly into electricity, a much more versatile form of energy. The greater efficiency means less land area required to produce the same amount of energy. With such a large difference in efficiency, should we have already given up on biofuels in favour of solar PV?

   Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this