Bioethanol, also known as bio-alcohol, refers to ethanol produced exclusively from biomass or, in rare cases, from biodegradable waste. Biomass usually consists of wheat, maize or rapeseed grown specifically for the production of bioethanol. "This form of production is not sustainable, which is no longer a secret," says Markus Geßner, Head of Marketing and Sales at Emil Otto GmbH. The same applies to the production of biofuels as an alternative to fossil fuels. These are produced from the same raw materials. Therefore, the CO₂ opportunity costs of biofuels, for example, can also be allocated to bioethanol. The CO₂ opportunity costs refer to the potential carbon storage from the renaturation of agricultural land. These correspond to the potential carbon storage lost through the further use of biofuels or bioethanol.
In a study on the CO₂ opportunity costs of biofuels in Germany published in 2022, the ifeu - Institute for Energy and Environmental Research Heidelberg GmbH[1] found that the cultivation of raw materials for the production of biofuels resulted in a saving in greenhouse gas emissions of 9.2 million tonnes of CO₂-eq. However, if the land used for this were to be used for the growth of natural vegetation, an average annual carbon sequestration of over 16 million tonnes of CO₂ would be possible. This means that the CO₂ opportunity costs of biofuel production are significantly higher than the reduction in emissions. In addition, the large areas under cultivation reduce biodiversity while simultaneously increasing water consumption. "The water requirement is enormous, as 3500 litres of water are needed for one litre of biofuel or bioethanol, depending on the weather and region," explains Mr Geßner.
As a recreational beekeeper, Mr Geßner is also very aware of the issue of biodiversity from his own experience: "We're all talking about bees dying out. We now also know what impact this has on our lives. Nevertheless, huge monocultures are still being cultivated to ultimately produce bioethanol. Not only are pesticides and the like used to ensure the yield of the cultivated areas, they also have a negative impact on species diversity and biodiversity. However, we believe that the use of bioethanol is not only wrong for ecological reasons, but also for ethical reasons. After all, the extensive use of agricultural land for these products has been proven to drive up food prices." Sufficient reasons for Emil Otto to dispense with bioethanol as a raw material for alcohol-based fluxes. "It is questionable when chemical products are labelled as 'organic' due to the addition of bioethanol. We manufacturers must therefore take a close look at what we process. I am not accusing anyone of green-washing. However, I think it is wrong to label a demonstrably unsustainable product "organic" for marketing reasons," emphasises Mr Geßner.
"Our alcohol-based electronic fluxes are produced almost exclusively with isopropyl alcohol due to its properties," says Mr Geßner. However, he also points out that for a few products, small quantities of bioethanol must also be processed by Emil Otto: "According to our research, we have been receiving ethanol with the main share from agricultural resources for more than 10 years, as ethanol based on other production methods is rarely available in pure and unmixed form."
[1] https://www.ifeu.de/projekt/co2-opportunitaetskosten-von-biokraftstoffen-in-deutschland/
Image source: Shutterstock