June 18, 2009

The Dirt on Biofuels

Are biofuels going to play a role in reducing greenhouse gas emissions? David Biello reports.

SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Earth

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

[Below is the original script. But a few changes may have been made during the recording of this audio podcast.]

The corn growing in fields across the Midwest will find a variety of uses after harvest this fall. Much will become food, either as classic corn on the cob, or the high fructose corn syrup in soft drinks, or as the animal feed that makes burgers.

But some will be fermented into the alcohol we know as ethanol and, by government mandate, blended into the nation's transportation fuel supply. The U.S. hopes to get 15 billion gallons of ethanol by 2015.

That may be good news for farmers but it doesn't help the world's eaters. Competition between food and fuel last year when oil reached $145 a barrel provoked riots from Mexico to Bangladesh.

And the potential for a crop price bonanza drives the cutting down of rainforests and heavy fertilizer application causing climate change and oceanic dead zones respectively.

Those problems might or might not be solved by more advanced biofuels, such as those made from the non-food or cellulosic parts of crop plants or even non-food crops such as switchgrass or algae. And a recent study found that burning such biomass to produce electricity delivered more environmental benefits than transforming it into liquid fuels.

So it seems that biofuels might not be the best solution for weaning the world off oil.

—David Biello

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American