Final Research Draft: Biodiesel’s Catch 22

When you go to the gas pump to fill your vehicle up, carbon dioxide toxins probably is not the first worry that pops into your head. More recently, the first concern of most people is that fast rising dollar sign on the pump. However, modern day environmental groups have been raising the issue of how the dependant use of oil is harming our environment. This is a paramount concern that has lead to the development of biodiesel as an alternative fuel source. The use of biodiesel is a controversial topic. There are many advantages to using biodiesel; it is biodegradable, non-toxic and essentially free of sulfur and aromatics. Biodiesel is also safer to handle and transport, and there are fewer noxious emissions than petroleum-based diesel. A study by the U.S. Department of Energy revealed that a 78.5 percent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions was linked to the production and use of biodiesel fuel. However, there are also many unseen, substantial consequences to using biodiesel as well. Manuel (2007) warns that biodiesel alternative fuel sources such as corn ethanol and soybean both need significant energy to produce, each have negative environmental consequences, and both could divert corn and soybeans away from the country’s food supply (p. A93). Exactly what the energy balance and environmental impacts are and whether these fuels should be subsidized has been the subject of heated debate among scientists, policy makers, and the public. Although biodiesel has many environmental benefits, it should not yet be used as an alternative to fuel because of its overall cost, increase in food prices, and the over farmed biodiesel crops.

Most everyone has heard of biodiesel, but exactly what biodiesel is may not be common knowledge. There are many different definitions of biodiesel. Biodiesel is a fast growing fuel alternative among fuel producers and consumers. According to Duffield (2007), biodiesel is a “diesel fuel substitute that is made from vegetable oils, animal fats, and yellow grease, which is primarily recycled cooking oil from restaurants and other food preparation facilities” (p. 1029).  This definition encompasses many factors that are included in most definitions of biodiesel, it is an alternative fuel source made from food sources such as vegetable oils and animal fats that can reduce emissions and pollutants that harm the environment. According to Manual (2007), the two leading alternative transportation fuel sources in the United States is corn grain ethanol and soybean and both of these alternative fuel sources be used in standard car and truck engines (p. A93).

There is a worldwide recognized need for the use of an alternative fuel source. According to Du, Li, Sun, Chen and Liu (2008) the global biodiesel industry has developed drastically over the past ten years (p. 331). The leader globally of biodiesel production has been European Union; European Union has increased their biodiesel production from 3.2 million tonnes in 2005 to close to 4.9 million tonnes in 2006 (Du et al., 2008, p. 331). Du et al., 2008 notes that, for European Union, this is a 54% annual growth for biodiesel production and consequently the European Union biodiesel production has increased two fold the last 2 years; it increased from 1.9 million 4.9 million from the years 2004 to 2006 (p. 331). Du et al., (2008) also examined the United States biodiesel production and noted that the United States, while not at the level of the European Union, has significantly increased biodiesel production over the last few years (p. 331). Production in the United States has risen greatly from the years 2000 to 2007; in 2000 biodiesel production was two million gallons and in 2006 biodiesel production was two hundred and fifty million gallons, and in 2007, biodiesel production jumped to four hundred and fifty million gallons (Du et al., 2008, p. 331). Du et al., (2008) also notes “according to the National Biodiesel Board, there are 105 plants in operation as of early 2007, with an annual production capacity of 864 million gal . . . an additional 1.7 billion gal of capacity may come online if current plants in construction are completed” (p. 331). Du et al., (2008) points out that by the year 2016, the Global Biodiesel market is anticipated to make 37 billion gallons which is an average annual growth of 42% (p. 331).

With such an increase of the production and use of biodiesel, it is obvious that there are some definite advantages of biodiesel over diesel. So many different companies and researchers are investing in biodiesel and alternative fuel sources; so, it is only fair that when exploring a controversial topic such as biodiesel, to consider the advantages associated with biodiesel. Balat (2009) states that one important feature of biodiesel is that its chemical properties allow it to be blended at any level with petroleum diesel to generate a biodiesel mix (p. 48). Hunt (2008) states that another advantage of biodiesel is that it is a certain, national energy source which is increasingly important with growing gas costs and is helpful in reducing the United States dependence of foreign oil (p. 48). Developing our own fuel source also does more than just reduce the United States dependence on foreign oil; it also reduces fuel costs and could help stimulate our economy by providing for more jobs as well as potentially becoming a fuel supplier for other nations. Biodiesel also reduces carbon dioxide emissions that are harmful to the atmosphere because it uses clean natural substances that do not release as much toxins when burned, whereas diesel fuel tends to emit these harmful toxins into the atmosphere. Biodiesel, by definition uses natural ingredients and therefore would not emit carbon dioxide.

These advantages are well worth investing in. However there are significant drawbacks to the way biodiesel is currently being produced. The first major disadvantage is the cost. According to Canakci and Sanli (2008) biodiesel is usually made from good quality food-grade vegetable oils, in the United States the main vegetable oil used is soybean oil (p. 434). Canakci and Sanli (2008) further assert that the increased cost of food grade oils is responsible for the increase in the cost of biodiesel and that this situation has become even more problematic because of the increase in the vegetable oil prices in recent years (p. 434). Feedstock is an important aspect of the topic of biodiesel. Feedstock is basic, raw material that is essential for certain industrial processes. The price of feedstock in the mid 1990’s was responsible for 60% to 75% of the total cost of biodiesel fuel and today, around 85% of the cost of producing biodiesel is attributed to feedstock cost. (Canakci & Sanli, 2008, p. 434) Canakci and Sanli (2008) conclude this claim by stating that in order “to become an economically viable alternative fuel and to survive in the market, biodiesel must compete economically with diesel fuel…however, the raw material cost of biodiesel is already higher than the final cost of diesel fuel”, and currently the unit price of biodiesel is one and a half to three times greater than the price of petroleum derived diesel fuel (p. 434).

The high cost of biodiesel is related to the second main disadvantage of biodiesel and that is the high food cost. Boyd (2008) backs this claim by concluding that as biofuel production increases, food prices increase as well as a result (p. 55). According to researchers at the International Food Policy Research Institute, between the years of 2000 and 2007, twenty-five to thirty-three percent of the increase in food costs appeared to be caused by the production of biofuel (Boyd, 2008, pp. 55-56). Hill (2006) also notes his concern for the biodiesel and food cost relationship (p. 11207). Hill (2008) states that biofuel cannot become an alternative for petroleum without consequently influencing food supplies (p. 11207). One surprising claim made by Hill (2008) is that even if all of the United States corn and soybean production were committed to making biofuel, this would only meet 12% of gasoline demand and only 6% of the total diesel demand (p. 11207). Runge and Senauer (2007) go so far as to suggest that biofuels in general may have such a devastating effect on the food supply, that it will increase the cost of food so much that it would make it hard for poor, lower class people to obtain food (p. 41).

While it may reduce carbon dioxide emissions, the last major disadvantage to using biodiesel is that it causes over farmed lands and deforestation. Eric Holtz-Jinienez, the director of Food First, stated that “Brazil is chopping down the Amazon, Argentina is tearing up the prairie, and Malaysia and Indonesia arc chopping down forests and burning up peat bogs for sugarcane and palm . . .and it’s not even about a renewable future . . . It’s about the South growing fuel for the North” (Boyd, 2008, p. 56). Boyd (2008) also stated that there are concerns that cultivating new land in order to grow crops for biofuel production has the potential to in fact increase carbon dioxide emissions (p. 56). Boyd (2008) goes on to explain that according to a study in Science, the production of corn could potentially result in almost two times the amount of ethanol greenhouse gas emissions as the gasoline it replaces (p. 56). Boyd states that the cause of this is attributed to the fact that CO² that has been stored in the soil for millennia gets released into the atmosphere when the grasslands and forests are converted to agricultural lands for biofuel production (p. 56). Traviss, Thelen, Ingalls, & Treadwell (2010) conducted a pilot study that compared the exposure to exhaust and those toxins of employees working at a rural municipal facility; these authors suggest that the exhaust from biodiesel was harmful to those employees (p. 1026). Lands could be over farmed, permanently harming them and preventing fruitful cultivation efforts in the future, could become a problem with using biodiesel. This occurs because biodiesel uses corn and soybean and other grown foods to make the biodiesel and creating enough biodiesel to run vehicles means growing a substantial amount of corn, soybeans, and whatever else would be used to make the biodiesel. Growing all these products just for American consumer consumption needs already requires a vast amount of land. Image how many more crops would need to be planted to feed America and provide biodiesel materials. This would undoubtedly lead to an over farmed agriculture system.

Overall, the current disadvantages plaguing biodiesel production far outweigh the advantages. There is hope though. Canakci and Sanli (2008) have pointed out that in order for biodiesel to thrive in the world and become a realistic and practicable alternative fuel source, biodiesel has to cost less than diesel (p. 434). In order for consumers to really consider the use of biodiesel it needs to be economically feasible for them. Manual (2007) agrees that there is potential for the biofuel industry, he states that the next move to be made is for there to be a biofuel crop that only needs low chemical and energy inputs and can give a return of greater energy and positive environmental affects (p. A95). As discussed throughout this paper, this is clearly not the case. Biodiesel has a real potential to be just as environmentally harmful as regular fuel, just in different ways that may not be as obvious as carbon dioxide pollution. Biodiesel, and biofuel as a whole, is currently significantly more expensive to produce than diesel, the subsequent affect on food cost is another detriment of biofuel. Canakci and Sanli (2008) offer some future implications and suggest that if biofuel is to become an economically feasible alternative fuel source than its high price of production needs to be lowered and a relatively easy way to do this is to use low-cost feedstock’s such as used frying oils, animal fats, soapstocks and greases (p. 434). This will not only decrease the production costs of biodiesel but also lower the affect that biofuel production has on food prices because it will not require corn and soybean crops. This domino affect also continues because since using low cost feedstock’s, the products will not require as much crop production, over-farming and deforestation will not occur and less pollutants will harm our environment. While biodiesel is a potentially advantageous alternative fuel source in that it can reduce carbon dioxide toxins, bring in revenue for the United States, reduce dependence on foreign oil and provide jobs in our country, biodiesel is still in its relatively new stages of discovery and there are still several problems with biodiesel’s impact on the environment and food supply that need to be seriously considered and corrected before biodiesel is used as an alternative fuel source.

 

References

 

Balat, M. (2009). Prospects for worldwide biodiesel market development. Energy Sources Part B: Economics, Planning & Policy, 4(1), 48-58. doi:10.1080/15567240701423951.

 

Boyd, R. (2008). The hunt for a sustainable biofuel. Earth Island Journal, 23(2), 55-58. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

 

Canakci, M., & Sanli, H. (2008). Biodiesel production from various feedstocks and their effects on the fuel properties. Journal of Industrial Microbiology & Biotechnology, 35(5), 431-441. doi:10.1007/s10295-008-0337-6.

 

Du, W., Li, W., Sun, T., Chen, X., & Liu, D. (2008). Perspectives for biotechnological production of biodiesel and impacts. Applied Microbiology & Biotechnology, 79(3), 331-337. doi:10.1007/s00253-008-1448-8.

 

Duffield, J. (2007). Biodiesel: Production and Economic Issues. Inhalation Toxicology, 19(12), 1029-1031. doi:10.1080/08958370701664890.

 

Hunt, S. (2008). Biofuels, Neither Saviour nor Scam. World Policy Journal, 25(1), 9-17. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

 

Hill, J., Nelson, E., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., & Tiffany, D. (2006). Environmental, economic, and energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(30), 11206-11210. doi:10.1073/pnas.0604600103.

 

Jenner, M. (2007). Biomass energy outlook. BioCycle, 48(11), 53. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database

 

Manuel, J. (2007). Battle of the biofuels. Environmental health perspectives, 115(2), A92-A95. Retrieved from Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition database.

 

McCormick, R. (2007). The impact of biodiesel on pollutant emissions and public health. Inhalation Toxicology, 19(12), 1033-1039. doi:10.1080/08958370701533509.

 

Naylor, R., Liska, A., Burke, M., Falcon, W., Gaskell, J., Rozelle, S., & Cassman, K. (2007). The ripple effect: Biofuels, food security, and the environment. Environment, 49(9), 30-43. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

 

O’Neill, G. (2006). The biofuels promise: updated thinking. Ecos, (133), 22-25. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database

 

Runge, C., & Senauer, B. (2007). How biofuels could starve the poor. Foreign Affairs, 86(3), 41-53. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

 

Tenenbaum, D. (2008). Diversion of crops could cause more hunger. Environmental Health Perspectives, 116(6), A254-A257. Retrieved from Academic Search Premier database.

 

Traviss, N., Thelen, B., Ingalls, J., & Treadwell, M. (2010). Biodiesel versus diesel: A pilot study comparing exhaust exposures for employees at a rural municipal facility. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association (1995), 61(3), 1026-1033. doi:10.3155/1047-3289.60.9.1026.

 

 

 

Advertisement