HomeMy WebLinkAboutExtension Advisory Council 2006
...
MEMBERS:
Mike Adams
Pat Alley
Dr. Calvin Arnold
Bob Bangert
sonny Beville
Grace B¡yant
EdCBrter
Stan Carter
Bob Davis
Pat Dunn
Havert Fenn
VemonFloyd
Betty Gray
MaA: Hamilton
Debbie Hawley
Ed Hayslip
Norman Hayslip
Adam Heltemes
Kathryn Hensley
Tom Kindred Jr.
Ed Lowtds
Sabine Marcl<s
Dr. AnnMcMuIlian
Hon. Rick Minton
David Neill
Bill Phares
Gal)' Roberts
Brant schirard
Dr Brian Scully
Lace Vitunae
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
EXTENSION ADVISORY COUNCIL
Kathryn Hensley, Chairperson
Lace Vitunac, Vice-Chairperson
. Pat Dunn, Secretary
8400 Picos Road, Suite 101
Ft. Pierce, FL 34945-3045
(772) 462-1660 Fax 462-1510
..¡-
September 25, 2006
Doug Coward, Chair 11 t1..;'
St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners V¡, 1/ /I p:1 t 1) f
2300 Virginia Avenue 0 I v IÍf' fl \
Fort Pierce FL 34982 i r,.. j ,f.¡/ 0
Dear Commissioner Coward, f Þ r I"'
The St. Lucie County Cooperative Extension Service Advisory Council met last Tuesday(.).,J ('
September 19 to discuss the opportunity to establish an ~culture Enhancement Board in S~. 'f
Lucie County. As discussed previously with county staff and each ofthe Commissioners this
proposed Board would:
* Hold public information meetings in accordance Section 286.011 FS for the purpose of
. receiving public input on matters relating to the agricultural industry.
* Review and make recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners on all
matters relating to problems and programs affecting the agricultural industry in St.
Lucie County.
* Recommend priorities for maintaining and promulgating the existence of agricultural
industries within the county, and
* Recommend methods to facilitate the continued operation of agricultural busineses in
St. Lucie County.
After much discussion regarding structure, purpose and authority, our Advisory Council voted
unanimously to support the creation of an Agriculture Enhancement Board. We will now begin
presenting this concept to other agriculturally-focused organizations within St. Lucie County to
gauge their support and incorporate their additional suggestions for structure and purpose.
Once we determine that there is sufficient community support, we will corne before the BOCC
to request formal establishment of this Board.
..
The Council recommends an Agricultural Enhancement Board made up of five members
appointed by the BOCc and two at large members selected by the Advisory Council. Those
interested in serving on this Board would make application to the St. Lucie County Extension
Office indicating their experience and knowledge level, and which facet of agriculture in St.
Lucie County they represent. Applications would be reviewed by the Extension Advisory
Council and staff, then a pool of qualified candidates would be provided to the BOCC for
their selection.
The St. Lucie County Extension Advisory Council welcomes this opportunity for the
agriculture community in St. Lucie County to have a voice with the Commission in matters
that directly affect their livelihood and the agriculture industry.
Sincerely,
Ad; ~
Káthryn Hensley, Chair
St. Lucie County Extension Advisory Council
KHI ASN/ca
UF FWRIDA
IFAS Extension
FE650
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in
Florida 1
Mohammad Rahmani and Alan Hodges2
Introduction
The United States is dependent upon imported
petroleum for over 60 percent of its transportation
fuels. Bio-fuels such as ethanol and bio-diesel have
significant potential to substitute for petroleum to
reduce this dependence on imported fossil fuels. The
oxygen content in bio-fuels also provides important
environmental benefits for reducing pollutant
emissions (SOx, NOx), and reducing net additions to
atmospheric CO2; thereby mitigating potential
harmful effects of global climate change. Presently,
production of ethanol in the United States is about 4
billion gallons annually, and is an important
component of the motor fuel supply. The corn-ethanol
industry's annual operations and capital spending for
new plants under construction added a total of $32.2
billion of gross output to the U.S. economy in 2005.
As a consequence of increased economic activity
caused by ethanol production activities, more than
153,000 jobs have been added in all sectors of the
U.S. economy, including over 19,000 jobs in
America's manufacturing sector. The production of
ethanol will put an additional $5.7 billion into the
pockets of U.S. consumers, and will add more than
$1.9 billion of tax revenue for the federal government
and nearly $1.6 billion for state and local
governments in 2006 (Urbanchuk, 2006). It should be
noted that government subsidies of about $1.4 billion
to fuel blenders (a tax credit of 51 cents per gallon of
fuel ethanol) plus $4 billion to corn producers have
encouraged the corn-to-ethanol program in the
United States (Pimentel, 2003; The New Atlantis,
2006).
Ethanol is mixed with gasoline at rates of 5 to 85
percent to make reformulated gasoline. Most
fuel-grade ethanol in the United States is currently
produced from corn, an abundant, low-cost
commodity, concentrated in the U.S. mid-western
region. Presently, there are two types of
ethanol-blended automobile gasolines: ElO and E85.
ElO, which is the most common type of
ethanol-blended gasoline, containing 10 percent
ethanol and 90 percent unleaded gasoline, can be used
in most cars, and can be purchased at many gas
stations. E85 is a blend that contains 85 percent
ethanol and 15 percent gasoline, but can be used only
in Flexible Fuel Vehicles (FFVs), and can be found
only in a few gas stations in the United States
(Pollack, 2005). Currently, there are about 600 E85
fuel stations (compared to about 170,000 gasoline
1. This is EDIS document FE650, a publication of the Food and Resource Economics Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food
and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida, Gainesville. FL. Published July 2006. Please visit the EDIS website at http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu.
2. Mohammad Rahmani, Coordinator of Economic Analysis, and Alan Hodges, Associate In, Food and Resource Economics Department, Florida
Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. University of Florida. Gainesville, FL.
The Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (IFAS) Is an Equal Opportunity Institution authorized to provide research, educational Information and
other services only to Individuals and Institutions that function with non-dlscrlmlnatlon with respect to race, creed, color, religion, age, disability, sex,
sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, political opinions or affiliations. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cooperative Extension Service,
University of Florida, IFAS, Florida A. & M. University Cooperative Extension Program, and Boards of County Commissioners Cooperating. Larry
Arrington, Dean
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida
2
stations), and 5 million FFVs (mostly as fleet
vehicles) in the United States (Mello, 2006)
To take advantage of the favorable climatic
conditions for biomass and bio-fuel production,
Florida has over 20 years of experience in research
and development on various aspects of biomass crop
production and conversion of biomass to energy
sources such as ethanol, methane, and electricity.
Research and extension centers of the University of
Florida's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences,
located throughout Florida, are involved in
conducting research on various aspects of biomass
production and utilization (Rahmani et aI., 2000). For
example, the Citrus Research and Education Center in
Lake Alfred has conducted studies on conversion of
citrus byproducts to ethanol.
This paper presents information on the potential
feedstock sources that may be used for ethanol
production in Florida. Conversion of cellulosic
materials to ethanol has not been considered as a
near-term technology in this publication. While
cellolosic materials such as wood and grasses may be
converted to ethanol, the saccharification of cellulose
is difficult and complex, requiring micro-organism
development in laboratories via genetic engineering
(Ingram and Doran, 1995). This conversion
methodology has yet to be applied on a commercial
scale.
Potential Feedstocks for Fuel Ethanol
Production in Florida
Sugarcane
Sugarcane is one of Florida's major crops that
can be grown throughout the state; however, it is
grown commercially only in the southern part of the
state for production of crystallized sugar, where soil
and climatic conditions are most favorable.
Sugarcane grown on about 400,000 acres in Florida
produced 13.4 million tons in the 2004-05 season and
17.3 million tons in the 2001-02 season (Baucum et
aI., 2006). Average sugarcane yields range from 32 to
38 tons per acre, and vary based on characteristics of
soil type, crop year, harvesting, and other agricultural
practices. While sugarcane is not a new crop in
Florida, growing it as feedstock for ethanol may be
considered a new use. It should be noted that at the
present time, there is no facility for conversion of
sugarcane to ethanol in Florida; however, there is the
potential for sugarcane-to-fuel ethanol production.
The average cost of sugarcane and its sugar
content are important factors for producing ethanol
from sugarcane. These factors depend on the variety
of sugarcane, type of soil, field preparation, and other
agricultural practices, and may also vary by crop
year. Estimates of average sugarcane cost range from
$30 to $35 per ton, including harvesting. Sugarcane
contains about 85 percent juice, which has roughly 11
percent sugar by weight (Baucum et aI., 2006).
There are two main components to the
conversion of ethanol from sugarcane: (1) production
of sugarcane and pressing to obtain sugarcane juice,
and (2) fermentation of juice to ethanol and
dehydration. Since the cost of producing sugarcane is
dependent on several factors, the cost of ethanol from
sugarcane in Florida can be estimated within a range.
Presently, there is no commercial sugarcane used for
fuel ethanol in Florida; therefore the data for
estimating the processing costs is based on Brazilian
data adjusted for higher labor costs in Florida. The
cost of sugarcane delivered at the mill represents
nearly two-thirds of the final ethanol cost (Leitz,
2005). A more detailed cost estimate puts the cost of
ethanol processing in Brazil at $0.32 a gallon
(Coelho, 2005). Considering all aspects, the
processing cost of sugarcane juice to ethanol in
Florida was estimated at $0.50 per gallon (Coelho,
2005; Regis Lima Verde Leal, 2005). This figure also
includes the benefit of burning bagasse (sugarcane
byproduct) which reduces the cost of processing.
Cost estimates were based on 200 gallons of
sugarcane juice from 1 ton of sugarcane. Conversion
rates for sugarcane juice to ethanol may vary based on
sugar content. Higher sugar content produces more
ethanol. As can be seen in Table 1, the cost of ethanol
production from sugarcane in Florida was estimated
for four scenarios representing various production
costs and sugar content. The total cost varies from a
low of $2.00 to a high of $2.56 per gallon of ethanol,
based on the effect of these factors.
Within the past 25 years, sugarcane yield has
improved by 33 percent, sugar content increased by
8.5 percent, extraction efficiency increased from 90
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida
to 97.5 percent, fermentation efficiency increased
from 82 to 91 percent, and the fermentation period
has been reduced from 16 hours to less than 9 hours
(Coelho, 2005). It should be noted, however, that a
sugarcane price of $11.4 per ton, feedstock cost of
$0.54 per gallon of ethanol, and total cost of
produced ethanol of $0.87 per gallon in Brazil have
not been achieved as a result of technological
advancement alone but by the favorable climatic
conditions and lower labor costs in that country
(Coelho, 2005). In addition, while the average yield
of sugarcane per acre in Brazil and the United States
is similar, sugarcane in Brazil is not irrigated (Walter
et aI., 2006).
Corn
As the predominant source for the production of
about 4 billion gallons of ethanol in the United States,
com could also be considered a potential source of
ethanol production in Florida. North Florida,
particularly the area adjacent to the Suwannee River,
has the potential for growing com as a feedstock for
conversion to ethanol. Results from com variety
studies in North Florida have shown com yields of
over 170 bushels per acre for short-season, irrigated
varieties, and 160 bushels per acre for full- and
mid-season irrigated varieties (Wright et aI., 2004).
However, the cost of producing high-yield com on
irrigated land in Florida is almost twice that for the
major U.S. com-producing states (Hewitt, 2006a).
Another problem is the contamination of Florida com
with aflotoxin (a fungous disease), which makes the
com byproduct (Distillers Dried Grains, or DDG)
unsuitable for animal feeding. This could increase the
cost of ethanol from corn in Florida; but this problem
could be mitigated by using resistant com varieties.
Production of ethanol from com in the United
States is an established technology. One bushel of
com can be converted to 2.7 gallons of ethanol
(Baker and Zahniser, 2006). Ethanol produced from
com costs about $1.20 per gallon (Shapouri et aI.,
2002; Wagner, 2006). These numbers are for com
grown in the major U.S. com-producing states. In
Florida, there has been no com-to-ethanol production
effort because the cost of producing corn in Florida
($3.15-$5.50 per bushel for irrigated corn, and
$3.94-$6.89 per bushel for dry-land corn) is much
3
higher than the national average of $1.95-$2.05 per
bushel (Hewitt, 2006a; Baker and Allen, 2006). In
addition, the issue of the suitability of DDG for
animal feeding may make the cost of ethanol from
Florida-grown corn even higher. Assuming a
favorable scenario of an average yield of 150 bushels
of irrigated corn per acre, the cost of grain com
would be $3.67 per bushel (Hewitt, 2006a). With
suitable DDG for animal feeding, the cost of ethanol
from Florida-grown corn would be about $1.82 a
gallon.
There is currently a plan by some investors to
buy com from the U.S. mid-western states as
feedstock for com-to-ethanol production in Florida
(Keller, 2006). It will take time to find out how
economically feasible this commercial endeavor will
be. Apparently, the feasibility study results have been
positive. A state construction permit for an $80
million ethanol production plant with a 40-million
gallon capacity at the Port of Tampa in Florida has
been granted (Keller, 2006). Based on a com price of
$1.95-$2.05 per bushel for the 2005-06 crop year
(Baker and Allen, 2006), the cost of ethanol from
com is estimated at $1.20 a gallon. This cost includes
the value of DDG as a credit. About 6.4 pounds of
DDG is produced for each gallon of fuel ethanol. At a
sale price of $0.045 per pound, DDG reduces the total
price of produced ethanol by $0.28 per gallon
(McAoon et aI., 2000). A $1 increase in the com price
would increase the price of ethanol by about $0.37
per gallon (at 2.7 gallons of ethanol per bushel of
com). The conversion of com shipped to Florida
from other states can also be taken into consideration,
assuming that the transportation cost would be less
than $1 per bushel. A barge transportation rate could
not be found for shipments from the com-producing
states to the Port of Tampa; however, a comparison
of com transportation rates to other ports indicates
that the transportation rate should be below $1 per
bushel (Hart and Yu, 2005).
The capital cost of a com-to-ethanol plant is
based on capacity, type of equipment, wastewater
treatment, processing CO2, and grain-ethanol milling
(wet milling, dry milling). The optimum capacity
depends on several factors, with feedstock availability
being the major factor. Based on various factors, a
grain-ethanol dry-mill facility of 40 to 65 million
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida
4
gallons per year is considered the optimum capacity.
Higher capacity requires abundant feedstock
available nearby. The average capital cost for an
optimum capacity dry-mill grain-ethanol is estimated
at about $2 per gallon of output (BBI International,
2001). Therefore, an ethanol plant with a 40-million
gallon capacity would require approximately $80
million in capital expenditures.
Citrus Byproducts
Citrus molasses is a byproduct of citrus-juice
processing that can be readily converted to ethanol.
The availability of citrus industry byproducts (e.g.,
citrus molasses) that could be converted to fuel
ethanol provides another ethanol source in Florida.
Citrus byproducts have been used mainly for animal
feeding purposes. There are some facilities in Florida
that process citrus molasses to produce beverage
ethanol; however, there has not been any experience
with conversion of citrus byproducts to fuel ethanol.
More than 38,000 tons of citrus molasses were
produced in the 2003-04 production year (Florida
Citrus Processors Association). Presently, 72-degree
Brix citrus molasses is used to produce beverage
ethanol and for the formulation of sweetened cattle
feed. "Citrus molasses has been used as a substrate
for the bioconversion of peel sugars to ethanol for 50
years. This ethanol is produced in a traditional batch
yeast fermentation from the molasses and is primarily
used as a neutral spirits for manufacture of alcoholic
beverages" (Braddock, 1999). The price of citrus
molasses depends on several factors of which total
citrus crop yield in a year is considered to have a
major effect. Delivered prices, including
transportation cost to conversion facilities, have
ranged from $80 to $100 per ton during the last few
years. Long-run (15 years) projections for Florida
citrus production indicate a slight yearly decrease,
which is going to affect the production of citrus
byproducts as well (Spreen et aI., 2006).
The Florida citrus industry produces an average
of 40,000 tons of citrus molasses per year (Florida
Citrus Processors Association). This amount may
vary by several thousand tons based on total citrus
production volume per crop year. Some citrus
byproducts (e.g., citrus peel) have more sugar content
than citrus molasses, but citrus molasses is
technically easier to convert to ethanol (Braddock,
1999). This is a practice that has been used by
distiller facilities for many years. Based on the
technical data (Braddock, 1999), 1 ton of molasses is
about 184 gallons and, on average, 4 gallons of
molasses is used to produce 1 gallon of ethanol. One
ton of citrus molasses can be converted to about 46
gallons of ethanol (96% alcohol), and 40,000 tons of
molasses can produce 1.84 million gallons of
ethanol. With the cost of 1 ton of citrus molasses
delivered at conversion facilities at between $80 and
$100, the feedstock cost of 1 gallon of ethanol (96%
alcohol) would range from $1.74 to $2.17. Adding to
this the average processing cost of $0.50, the total
cost of 1 gallon of ethanol from citrus molasses
would be between $2.24 and $2.67. This ethanol is
not fuel grade, and it has to be dehydrated to get 99.9
percent alcohol, which increases the total cost.
Ethanol loses about 4 percent of its volume when it is
dehydrated (Regis Lima Verde Leal, 2005), and the
cost of dehydration, including the volume loss, raises
the cost of fuel ethanol from citrus molasses by $0.06
to $0.10 per gallon (Lilliston, 2005). Adding the
dehydration cost, fuel ethanol from citrus molasses
would cost between $2.30 and $2.77 per gallon.
Sweet Sorghum
Sweet sorghum is another possible source for
ethanol, but there has been no experience on a
commercial scale. In Florida, sorghum is grown for
grain and silage (National Agricultural Statistics
Service, 2004).
The silage type of sweet sorghum is the type
suitable for ethanol production. In Florida, there are
over 3,500 acres of sweet sorghum for silage, with a
total yield of over 35,000 tons (National Agricultural
Statistics Service, 2004). A 1995 demonstration
project funded by the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory, Department of Energy, looked into the
possibility of using sweet sorghum (among other
crops) for conversion to ethanol in Central Florida.
The results did not provide any clear indication of
feasibility for growing sorghum for ethanol using
conventional technology. Since the study was done
on reclaimed lands in central Florida, some technical
issues, such as harvesting on particular soil types,
appeared to hinder the agricultural practices during
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida
5
Conclusions
the rainy season. Both sweet and forage sorghum
have a high risk for lodging that can result in harvest
problems, with ensuing loss of yield from both the
initial and ratoon crops (Stricker, 1996).
Sweet sorghum can produce up to 10 dry tons
per acre. The cost of sorghum production and its
sugar content are crucial for conversion of sorghum
to ethanol. In Florida, sweet sorghum (USDA M81E)
on clay tailings from phosphate mining has yielded
about 13 dry tons per acre (Stricker, 1996). Costs of
producing (growing and harvesting) sorghum for
silage vary based on the cultivar, soil conditions,
harvesting, and agricultural practices. In the North
Florida region, silage sorghum yield ranges from 3.5
to 6.3 dry tons per acre, and production costs,
including harvesting, ranges from $50 to $90 per dry
ton (Hewitt, 2006b).
Based on results of a study on growing and
converting sorghum to ethanol (McBee et aI., 1988),
1 acre of sorghum can yield up to 7.59 tons of
oven-dried stem and about 1,240 pounds of grain.
One acre of sorghum (Rio cultivar) can produce 364
gallons of ethanol, whereas the next best cultivar
(M35-1) produced about 166 gallons of ethanol per
acre. Other cultivars registered lower yields for stem
but higher grain per acre. Based on this data, 1 ton of
sorghum can yield 22 to 48 gallons of ethanol. While
there are some cost estimates for sorghum production
in Florida, there is no cost estimate for conversion of
sorghum to ethanol. Costs associated with conversion
include transportation to processing facilities, juice
extraction, and processing to ethanol. Without a
sorghum-to-ethanol conversion facility to obtain
reliable data, any estimates may be speculative.
However, based on data from other types of sugar
containing juice processing, estimates of about $0.75
per gallon of ethanol can be made for all the
associated conversion costs. With an estimated cost
of sorghum as feedstock of $64 per ton (median
cost), the estimated cost of ethanol from sorghum
ranges from $2.08 to $3.65 per gallon (Table 2). The
sorghum-to-ethanol study did not indicate the alcohol
content of the ethanol produced.
The best potential scenario for ethanol
production in Florida showed the cost of ethanol
from com and sugarcane at $1.82 and $2.00 per
gallon, respectively. The lowest cost ethanol from
citrus molasses and sorghum was estimated at $2.34
and $2.18 per gallon, respectively. Ethanol cost
estimates for molasses and sorghum included a
dehydration cost of $0.10 per gallon. The economic
feasibility of each of these crops requires further data
and technical analysis. So far, only com shipped from
other states to Florida has been considered for ethanol
production on a commercial scale.
Sugarcane is an established crop in Florida.
Processing sugarcane juice to ethanol is an
established technology in Brazil, which has proven to
be very successful. Productivity in sugarcane
production and efficiency in juice processing and
ethanol production have been improved drastically.
Any effort toward implementing a
sugarcane-to-ethanol industry in Florida has to
consider issues such as waste management, sugarcane
production costs, and the impact on the sugar market.
Currently, the U.S. sugar policy has two main
elements: the non-recourse loan program, which
supports the U.S. price of sugar, and the tariff-rate
quota import system (TRQ), which ensures that there
is an adequate supply of sugar at reasonable prices for
both consumers and producers (Haley, 2005). As the
sole feedstock source for sugar production in Florida,
alternative uses of sugarcane may affect the quantity
of sugar production in Florida, which eventually may
have some impact on U.S. sugar policy. While
analyzing this impact is beyond the scope of this
paper, the extent of such probable impacts may be
analyzed once the alternative uses of sugarcane are
taken into consideration.
While citrus molasses is converted to ethanol as
an established process, the cost of ethanol is higher,
and the total amount of citrus molasses per year is
insignificant. Even if the total yearly production of
about 40,000 tons were processed to ethanol, the total
ethanol produced would be about 1.84 million
gallons, which is less than half of a percent of total
ethanol production from com in the United States.
Ethanol processing is sub-economic for plants
typically less than 40 million gallons per year.
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida
6
Sorghum cultivars have the potential for ethanol
production; however, the agricultural practices for
growing sweet sorghum for ethanol have not been
established, and the conversion process must be
tested and developed at a more expanded level.
Considering all aspects, it seems that with the present
price of about $3 per gallon for ethanol, it may still be
economically viable to ship com from major
com-producing states to produce ethanol in Florida.
Also, if com can be produced at about $3 a bushel in
Florida and its DDG suitability for animal
consumption is assured, it may still be a viable option
to grow com and convert it to ethanol. Considering
the best possible scenarios, Table 3 compares the cost
per gallon and yield per acre for ethanol from selected
feedstocks in Florida.
References
BBI International. 2001. Ethanol Plant
Development Handbook, Third Edition. Salida, CO:
BBI International.
Baker, A., and E. Allen. 2006. Feed Outlook.
Electronic Outlook Report FDS-06d. Economic
Research Service, United States Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C. ,(May 16).
http://usda.mannlib.comell.edu/reports/ erssor/field/
fds- bbI2006/fds06d. pdf.
Baker, A., and S. Zahniser. 2006. Ethanol
Reshapes the Com Market. Economic Research
Service, United States Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C. (April).
http://www .ers. usda.gov/ AmberW aves/ Apri106/
FeaturesÆthanol.htm.
Baucum, L.E., R.W. Rice, and T.G. Schuneman.
2006. An Overview of Florida Sugarcane. Electronic
Data Information Source (ED IS) SC032. Agronomy
Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/SC032.
Braddock, Robert J. 1999. Handbook of Citrus
By-Products and Processing Technology. New York,
NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Coelho, Suani. 2005. Brazilian Sugarcane Ethanol:
Lessons Learned. The Brazilian Reference Center on
Biomass. STAP Workshop on Liquid Biofuel, New
Delhi, India (August 29-September 1).
http://stapgef. unep.org/docs/folder.2005-12-
07.815877 4253/folder.2005-12-08.9446059805/
folder.2005-12-08.0238464777/folder.2005-12-
20.8533782016/
Brazilian% 20Sugarcane%20Ethanol %20-
%20Lessons%20Learned,
%20Prof%20Suani %20Coelho. pdf.
Florida Citrus Processors Association. Statistical
Summary 2003-04 Season. FCPA, Winter Haven, FL.
http://www.fcplanet.org/arch_weekly/
FCP A %20YrBk%200304.pdf.
Haley, S. 2005. Sugar and Sweeteners: Policy.
Briefing Rooms, Update. Economic Research
Service, United States Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C. (June 1).
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Sugar/Policy.htm.
Hart, C.E., and Tun-Hsiang Yu. 2005.
Agricultural Situation Spotlight: Com Prices, Basis,
and Transportation. Iowa Ag Review 11(4).
http://www .card.iastate .edu/iowa_ag_revi ew /fal L 05/
article2.aspx.
Hewitt, T. 2006a. Two Reports - Estimated
Costs of One Acre of Irrigated Com, North Florida;
and Estimated Costs of One Acre of Dryland Com,
North Florida. North Florida Research and Education
Center, University of Florida, Marianna, FL.
http://nfrec .ifas. ufl.edu/Hewi tt/B udgets/
field%20crop%20irrig%20com.xls and
http://nfrec .ifas. ufl.edu/Hewi tt/B udgetsl
field%20crop%20dryland%20com.xls.
Hewitt, T. 2006b. Estimated Costs of One Acre
of Grain Sorghum, North Florida. North Florida
Research and Education Center, University of
Florida, Marianna, FL.
http://nfrec .ifas. ufl.edu/Hewi tt/B udgets/
field%20crop%20grain % 20sorghum.xls.
Ingram, L.O., and J.B. Doran. 1995. Conversion
of Cellulosic Materials to Ethanol. FEMS
Microbiology Reviews 16(2):235-241.
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida
7
Keller, A. 2006. Starter Fuel. Florida Trend
Magazine (May).
Leitz, Rogerio Cezar de Carqueira. 2005.
Overview of Biomass Energy Processes from
Primary Sources to End Use, Liquid Fuel. R&D of
Energy Technology, Annex AlII-Renewable Energy,
109-191. Interdisciplinary Center for Energy
Planning, State University of Campinas, Sao Paulo,
Brazil. http://www.iupap.org/wg/energy/annex-lc.pdf.
Lilliston, B. 2005. CAFTAs Impact on U.S.
Ethanol Market. Institute for Agriculture and Trade
Policy, Minneapolis, MN (June).
http://www . tradeobservatory .org/
library.cfm?refid=73232. [A $10 million ethanol
dehydration facility will have a capacity of about 63
million gallons annually].
McAoon, A, F. Taylor, W. Yee, K. Ibsen, and R
Wooley. 2000. Determining the Cost of Producing
Ethanol from Com Starch and Lignocellulosic
Feedstocks. NREL/TO-580-28893. National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO
(October).
http://webdev . its. iastate.edu/webnews/dataJ
si te _ biorenew _reading/14/webnewsfilefield_file/
Cost-of- Ethanol. pdf.
McBee, G.G., RA Creelman, and F.R Miller.
1988. Ethanol Yield and Energy Potential of Stems
from a Spectrum of Sorghum Biomass Types.
Biomass 17(3):203-211.
Mello, T.B. 2006. Fueling Up with Ethanol: Are
Flexible Fuel Vehicles the Answer to Our Oil
Addiction? Edmunds Online (February 7).
http://www .edmunds.comJadvice/fueleconomy/
articles/l09194/article.html.
National Agricultural Statistics Service. 2004.
2002 Census of Agriculture, Florida State and County
Data, Volume 1, Geographic Area Series, Part 9,
AC-02-A-9. NASS, United States Department of
Agriculture, Washington, D.C. (June).
http://www .nass .usda.gov /census/census02/volume 1/
fl/fllintro.pdf.
New Atlantis Editors. 2006. Addicted to Bad
Data, Getting the Facts Straight on Ethanol. The New
Atlantis, A Journal of Technology & Society, A Survey
of Technology and Society 12: 119-121.
http://www . thenewatlantis.comJarchi ve/12/soa!
ethanol.htm.
Pimentel, D. 2003. Ethanol Fuels: Energy
Balance, Economics, and Environmental Impacts Are
Negative. Natural Resources Research 12(2).
http://www .ethanol-gec.org/netenergy /
neypimentel. pdf.
Pollok, J.E. 2005. Ethanol-America's
Renewable Fuel. Check Off Report and Newsletter,
Com Marketing Program of Michigan, Dewitt, MI.
http://www.micom.orgldownloads/
EthanolNewsltrAug05. pdf.
Rahmani, M., AW. Hodges, C.F. Kiker, and A
Shiralipour. 2000. Biomass Research and
Development in Florida: Results of Twenty Years
Experience. Proceedings of Bioenergy 2000, The
Ninth Biennial Bioenergy Conference, Buffalo, NY
(October 15-19).
Regis Lima Verde Leal, M. 2005. Better Sugar;
Better Business, Mill Issues and Co-Products. WWF
Workshop, London, UK (June23-24).
http://assets . panda.org/ downloads/
millissuesandcoproducts. pdf.
Shapouri, H., J.A Duffield, and M. Wang. 2002.
The Energy Balance of Corn Ethanol: An Update.
Agricultural Economic Report Number 813. Office
of Energy Policy and New Uses, United States
Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. (July).
Spreen, T.H., RE. Barber, Jr., M.G. Brown,
AW. Hodges, J.C. Malugen, W.D. Mulkey, RP.
Muraro, RP. Norberg, M. Rahmani, P.M. Roka, and
RE. Rouse, 2006. An Economic Assessment of the
Future Prospects for the Florida Citrus Industry.
Florida Department of Citrus, Lakeland, FL and
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL (March).
http://www Jred.ifas .ufl.edu/
economic _assess_flciturus _indus. pdf.
Stricker, James A (Editor). 1995. Economic
Development through Biomass Systems Integration in
Central Florida. Technical Report, National
Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO (May 15).
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida
8
Urbanchuk, J.M. 2006. Contribution of the
Ethanol Industry to the Economy of the United
States. Renewable Fuels Association, Washington.
D.C. (Feb. 21).
Wagner, K. 2006. Fuel from Corn. The Kansas
City Star, (May 17). Accessed online July 24, 2006 at
http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/
14596471.htm.
Walter, A., Paulo Dolzan, and Erik Piacente.
2006. Biomass Energy and Bio-energy Trade:
Historic Development in Brazil and Current
Opportunities. Country Report: Brazil- Task 40 -
Sustainable Bio-energy; Securing Suppy and
Demand, Final Version, State University of
Campinas - Unicamp, Campinas, Brazil.
http://www . bioenergytrade. org/plaintextldownloads/
brazi1countryreport. pdf.
Wright, D.L., J.J. Marois, P.J. Wiatrak, and B.
Kidd. 2004. Florida 2003 Short, Mid, and Full Season
Corn Variety Tests for Silage and Grain. Electronic
Data Information Source (ED IS) AG227. Agronomy
Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL.
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/AG227.
Potential Feedstock Sources for Ethanol Production in Florida
9
Table 1. Estimated cost of ethanol from sugarcane in Florida.
Cost of Sugarcane Ethanol Yield Feedstock Cost Total Cost of Ethanol
Production and from Sugarcane
Harvesting
(dollars/ton) (gallons/ton) ( dollars/gallon) ( dollars/gallon)
$30 20 $1.50 $2.00
$30 17 $1.77 $2.27
$35 20 $1.75 $2.25
$35 17 $2.06 $2.56
Table 2. Estimated cost of Ethanol from Various Sorghum Cultivars in Florida.
Cost of Sorghum Ethanol Yield Feedstock Cost Total Cost of Ethanol
Production from Sorghum
( dollars/ton) (gallons/ton) ( dollars/gallon) ( dollars/gallon)
$64 48 $1.33 $2.08
$64 24 $2.90 $3.65
Table 3. Ethanol cost and yield for selected feedstocks in Florida (best potential scenario).
Corn" Sugarcane Sweet Sorghum Citrus Molasses
Cost (dollar/ton) $1.82 $2.00 $2.18 $2.34
Yield (gallon/acre) 405 595 302 N/A
" Based on $3.67 per bushel cost of corn.
N/A = Not Applicable