by Lin Sun Oo
The resurgence of biofuels as a source of alternative energy is certainly not short of controversy. Advocates of biofuels argue that it is a potential replacement for petroleum. Opponents of biofuels have argued that the poor will further be marginalized when agriculture steers away from food to fuel the energy needs of developing countries. The environmental impacts of biofuels have been argued on both sides of the spectrum. Proponents argue that biofuels help in mitigating climate change by replacing carbon emitting fossil fuels. However, environmentalists have stated that biofuels could lead to the loss of topsoil. Certain environmentalist have expressed concerns over the water intensive agricultural practices, use of pesticides, and the negative effects of large scale agriculture that biofuels could cause to an ecosystem. The benefits and disadvantages of biofuels have often been compared with its performance to petroleum. Biofuels are a leading candidate to replace petroleum as a renewable source of energy for transportation. As such, a historical exposition of the battle between biofuels and petroleum would help us to understand the controversies, political risks, and economic gains of biofuels.
Biofuels were once touted as a potential contender to petroleum during the infancy of the automobile industry. As the automobile industry matured, petroleum became the preferred choice for fuel. Several political, technological, and economic factors favored petroleum over biofuels. Government incentives, subsidies, and encouragement from political actors had aggrandized the oil industry to ensure that petroleum was the leading source of fuel for the automobile industry. Technologically, the extraction of oil provides more than just petroleum for automobiles. Petroleum based products are versatile and have been used extensively in products ranging from household items, commercial retail and industrial products. Economically, petroleum as a fuel source provides a higher yield of energy return on invested (EROI). Currently, petroleum plays an integral role in world energy consumption. In the United States, the Department of Energy indicated that 37.4% of energy use is derived from petroleum. In comparison, renewable energies such as biofuels only account for about 7.3%. The oil crisis of 1973 and the resulting scare over energy security placed biofuels back into discussion as a means to offset heavy reliance on oil from the Middle East. In discussing alternative energy solutions, agriculture dominant regions favored initiating more biofuels projects. Political advocates promote biofuels under the banner of energy sovereignty and economic growth of fuel through agriculture.
The resurgence of biofuels as a source of alternative energy is certainly not short of controversy. Advocates of biofuels argue that it is a potential replacement for petroleum. Opponents of biofuels have argued that the poor will further be marginalized when agriculture steers away from food to fuel the energy needs of developing countries. The environmental impacts of biofuels have been argued on both sides of the spectrum. Proponents argue that biofuels help in mitigating climate change by replacing carbon emitting fossil fuels. However, environmentalists have stated that biofuels could lead to the loss of topsoil. Certain environmentalist have expressed concerns over the water intensive agricultural practices, use of pesticides, and the negative effects of large scale agriculture that biofuels could cause to an ecosystem. The benefits and disadvantages of biofuels have often been compared with its performance to petroleum. Biofuels are a leading candidate to replace petroleum as a renewable source of energy for transportation. As such, a historical exposition of the battle between biofuels and petroleum would help us to understand the controversies, political risks, and economic gains of biofuels.
Biofuels were once touted as a potential contender to petroleum during the infancy of the automobile industry. As the automobile industry matured, petroleum became the preferred choice for fuel. Several political, technological, and economic factors favored petroleum over biofuels. Government incentives, subsidies, and encouragement from political actors had aggrandized the oil industry to ensure that petroleum was the leading source of fuel for the automobile industry. Technologically, the extraction of oil provides more than just petroleum for automobiles. Petroleum based products are versatile and have been used extensively in products ranging from household items, commercial retail and industrial products. Economically, petroleum as a fuel source provides a higher yield of energy return on invested (EROI). Currently, petroleum plays an integral role in world energy consumption. In the United States, the Department of Energy indicated that 37.4% of energy use is derived from petroleum. In comparison, renewable energies such as biofuels only account for about 7.3%. The oil crisis of 1973 and the resulting scare over energy security placed biofuels back into discussion as a means to offset heavy reliance on oil from the Middle East. In discussing alternative energy solutions, agriculture dominant regions favored initiating more biofuels projects. Political advocates promote biofuels under the banner of energy sovereignty and economic growth of fuel through agriculture.
The introduction of first generation biofuels drew criticism over the use of feedstock such as grain that was being used as a fuel source and diverted from food consumption. With an increasing population concerns were expressed amidst the shift of food products over to fuel. The first generation biofuels projects were seen as diverting critical food sources from marginalized populations to fuel the energy needs of expanding developing countries. Moreover, environmentalist argue water intensive large scale agricultural projects for biofuels will cause an decrease access to much needed ground water, increases the loss in topsoil, and destroy native ecosystems as countries find biofuels more profitable and decide to expand. With opposition over the use of food crops as feedstock, the second generation of biofuels concentrates on non food crops such as algae, waste biomass, and cellulosic biofuels. Despite criticism and concerns over environmental impacts, ethanol has gained popularity among political actors looking to increase energy sovereignty.
Widespread mandates in various countries have increased the use of biofuels in a range of measures. Brazil produces 3.2 million gallons of biodiesel fuel per year. As such, Brazil meets 17% of its transportation needs from bioethanol. Biomass feedstock in the biofuels industry of Brazil consists of sugar cane, soy beans, and castor bean. Similar to initiatives introduced in Brazil countries such as China, Australia, the European Union, and the United States have taken various legislative initiatives to increase the use of biofuels. EU countries have targeted an increase in biofuels to 20% of the market share for energy production by the year 2020. In the United States, the 2007 Energy Security and Independence Act allowed for the use of 36 billion gallons of biofuels by 2022. Currently about 10% of ethanol is added with standard gasoline in the United States. In Europe similar programs have been mandated for the expansion of biofuels, such as ethanol, in public transportation and at the fuel pumps.
Despite the increase in biofuels programs worldwide, environmental concerns still remain a crucial test for biofuels as a renewable energy alternative. Despite introducing non food crop feedstock for biofuels sources, water pollution, and loss of forests have been a huge factor in environmental opposition for an increase in biofuels. Environmentalist argue that burning down forests, and destroying native ecosystems for agricultural purposes could potentially create more green house gases than gained through biofuels. Despite potential for energy security, environmental concerns, and food security will remain a critical obstacle for the biofuels industry to overcome. Sustainable biofuels such as jathropa, switch grass, and algae are still in their infancy. If they are going to develop, greater subsidies and research are needed to make biofuels more economically viable for public consumption. Until then, opinions over biofuels will vacillate between a blessing and a controversy.
Lin Sun Oo is an environmental policy research intern at Bridging Nations in Washington D.C.
