Study: Biofuel from corn waste not better than gas

The latest study into whether fuel made from the residue of corn crops is good for the environment has only created confusion.

Biofuels made from the leftovers of harvested corn plants are worse than gasoline for global warming in the short term, a study shows, challenging the Obama administration’s conclusions that they are a much cleaner oil alternative and will help combat climate change.

The study, which was paid for by the federal government, said that corn waste biofuel would be better than gasoline in the long run, but that the most immediate way to keep carbon out of the air would be to just leave the corn residue in the field, instead of turning it into fuel.

This comes just as a $200 million facility is about to open in Iowa to produce ethanol from corn waste.

The peer-reviewed journal Nature Climate Change concluded that biofuels made with corn residue release 7 percent more greenhouse gases in the early years compared with conventional gasoline.

The conclusions deal a blow to what are known as cellulosic biofuels, which have received more than a billion dollars in federal support but have struggled to meet volume targets mandated by law. About half of the initial market in cellulosics is expected to be derived from corn residue.

The biofuel industry and administration officials immediately criticized the research as flawed. They said it was too simplistic in its analysis of carbon loss from soil, which can vary over a single field, and vastly overestimated how much residue farmers actually would remove once the market gets underway.

“The core analysis depicts an extreme scenario that no responsible farmer or business would ever employ because it would ruin both the land and the long-term supply of feedstock. It makes no agronomic or business sense,” said Jan Koninckx, global business director for biorefineries at DuPont.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.