Bioethanol and biodiesel are both environmentally friendly fuels. They are manufactured from organic sources like jatropha, soybean, algae, and oil palm. Sugar cane and sugar beet are also used as source materials for bioethanol and its ancillary alternative fuel products. The result of bioethanol vs. biodiesel debate essentially depends upon the planting and the quality of crop production.
The material for the bioethanol vs. biodiesel debate is hard to come by. This is due to the paucity of serious investors until recently. Most of the research conducted in this field is proprietary and not in the public domain. Many research papers are not published. A lot of available data is unsubstantiated and often overestimate or underestimate the crop yields and production efficiencies.
Both biodiesel and bioethanol commercial production plants are dependent on a preliminary PEEST analysis (Political, Economic, Environmental, Social, and Technical). The political factors differ from one country to another. The European countries promote biodiesel to reduce their dependency on imported mineral petro-fuels. The United States of America also promotes biodiesel and bioethanol with the same objective. Developing countries like India and China promote biodiesel plants for greater job creation in addition to energy self sufficiency.
The environmental factors in the bioethanol vs. biodiesel debate often comes with economic lines of thought. These factors are measured on the basis of two parameters: Net Energy Balance (NEB) and Life-Cycle Cost Analysis (LCA). The Life-Cycle Cost Analysis covers all expenses from the start of the project to the end of the commercial exercise. LCA studies in the biofuel sphere are concentrated towards net energy consumption. Automobiles are the crux of such studies. It is to be kept in mind that external factors like efficiency of the engine, cost of fuel, and service costs are also taken into account to calculate the end result.
According to LCA parameters, biodiesel processed from soybeans are more cost effective than comparable bioethanol. The former is found to be 20% more efficient than the latter. Ethanol produced from corn, however, was found to generate more effective commercial energy compared to other ethanol production sources. The findings point out to the localization of the source substance. For example, corn growing regions or countries may find bioethanol more economically suitable than importing raw ingredients like soybean for producing biodiesel.
The Net Energy Balance (NEB) focuses its calculations on energy input versus energy output. It does not take factors like economic expense into its research. Development of newer and more efficient technologies raises the NEB value. Net Energy Balance studies indicate that biodiesel possess a value of 3.2 (extracted from soybeans) and bioethanol has a value of 1.38 from corn. More efficient processes deliver a value of 2.62 for ethanol.