|
Do Biofuels Generate More Greenhouse Gas than Oil? |
 |
 |
 |
|
The unresolved issues of using valuable land for growing monocrops to feed machines is cause enough for concern. The need for increased use of fertilisers, pesticides, water, soil and genetically modified seeds are all weighing heavily against the practicality of biofuels technology. Surely with almost 7 billion human brains on earth we can do better? Basically we need to harness another form of energy generation altogether, and we need it in a hurry.
Which Is Worse - Fossil Fuels or Biofuels? Is this a trick question or what? Biofuels were promoted as a renewable energy source designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but they are contributing more to global warming than fossil fuels, the study suggests. Measurements of emissions from the burning of biofuels derived from rapeseed and maize have been found to produce more emissions than they save. Other biofuels, especially those likely to see greater use, performed better than fossil fuels but the study raises serious questions. Rapeseed and maize biodiesels were calculated to produce up to 70 per cent and 50 per cent more greenhouse gases respectively than fossil fuels. Concerns were raised over the levels of emissions of nitrous oxide, which is 296 times more powerful as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Scientists found that the use of biofuels released twice as much as nitrous oxide as previously realised. The research team found that 3 to 5 per cent of the nitrogen in fertiliser was converted and emitted. In contrast, the figure used by the International Panel on Climate Change, which assesses the extent and impact of man-made global warming, was 2 per cent. The findings illustrated the importance, the researchers said, of ensuring that measures designed to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions are assessed thoroughly before being hailed as a solution. “One wants rational decisions rather than simply jumping on the bandwagon because superficially something appears to reduce emissions,” said Keith Smith, a professor at the University of Edinburgh and one of the researchers. “The significance of these results is that the supposed benefits of biofuels are disputable.” The world is slowly being forced to change. The major international oil companies that dominated energy markets throughout the latter half of the 20th century—the Exxon- Mobils, BPs, and Royal Dutch Shells—now own less than 10 percent of the world’s oil and gas. They’ve been pushed aside by government-controlled national oil companies, which now command close to 80 percent of the world’s remaining oil reserves and overwhelmingly dominate oil production and pricing.
South Africa, The Biggest Polluter of all, Courtesy of Eskom There’s no escape from the reality that we are overly dependent on oil and coal. Any research, engineering and manufacturing strategy that relies on the use of a finite, polluting resource is dangerously lacking in foresight. We need a grand solution with long-term potential. To this end, electricity may be the answer, as long as it is generated through hydrological or nuclear technology. SA unfortunately has high reserves of low grade coal, and so has the dubious distinction of being the biggest polluter per capita on earth. The desire to make our lives too comfortable comes at an enormous, unfathomable cost to the earth.
|
|
