As the climate crisis finally has become a household concern, decision makers struggle with policy choices. Counteracting climate change has driven a search for alternative fuels rather than the conventional fossil fuels, oil, coal, and natural gas. These fossil fuels produce carbon dioxide, the major cause of global warming.
As an energy source, biofuels have won support and drawn criticism. The main biofuels in the U.S. today are ethanol made from corn and, to a lesser extent, biodiesel made from oilseeds (like soybeans, palm nuts, and rapeseed). Currently in development is cellulosic ethanol made from woody plants, switchgrass and organic wastes.
Rather than a green elixir, skeptics from both the left and the right argue that biofuel peril trumps biofuel promise. Cultivating, harvesting and refining crops into fuel requires energy, most of which comes from fossil fuels.
Critics argue that global biofuel production can raise food prices, spur fertilizer and pesticide use, shrink scarce water supplies, bring deforestation, reduce biodiversity, eliminate
Advertisement
wildlife habitat, lead to serious food shortages, increase poverty, further consolidation of corporate agribusiness and harm small farmers and rural communities. Besides, the potential total energy produced by America's ethanol plants amounts to only a tiny fraction of the overall energy market.
As a fuel source, moreover, ethanol contains just two-thirds as much energy as gasoline. And it takes more energy to produce a gallon of ethanol than it actually contains. Whether corn or cellulosic, ethanol production will increase America's total energy consumption, not decrease it. Adding more ethanol and other crop-based fuels also can worsen air quality.
Oil dependence and global warming intersect in America's transportation sector. Cars and trucks account for two-thirds of our total oil use, and oil generates one-third of the U.S. carbon dioxide emissions that cause global warming pollution.
Energy efficiency is the cleanest, cheapest and fastest way to cut oil demand. Raising fuel economy standards for our cars and light trucks, for example, saves money at the pump, cuts oil dependence and curbs global warming. A 3 percent increase in fuel economy standards for vehicles would save more gas than the entire 2006 production of corn ethanol.
Battery-electric, plug-in hybrids and hydrogen-fuel cell vehicles produce few toxic emissions or greenhouse gases and cause little disruption to the land, unlike the millions of acres required for the mass production of ethanol. Traveling on electricity generates no tailpipe pollution and costs 1-2 cents per mile compared to 10-15 cents per mile for traveling on gasoline or biofuels. One expert estimates that replacing the entire U.S. vehicle fleet with plug-in hybrids would decrease the nation's oil consumption by 70 percent.
Beyond the transportation sector, industrial, residential and commercial energy efficiency measures can cut energy usage and save money. This can be accomplished by increasing the energy efficiency standards applied to building design and construction, appliances, heating and cooling, lighting, computer applications and electric motors. A comprehensive energy program includes such conservation measures as improvements in recycling and mass transit.
When designing public policy to encourage the highest and best use of our energy resources, wind and sunlight, which can be harnessed for thermal, mechanical and electrical energy, meet the test. Plants, on the other hand, are problematic partly because they can be used for many non-fuel purposes: human nutrition, pharmaceuticals, clothing, chemicals, animal feed and building materials.
Most of the important global warming initiatives have come from the state and local levels. But America needs a national energy policy that moves us beyond our reliance on polluting fossil fuels.
With the technology and knowledge now available, we can begin to make the transformation. Besides, renewable energy creates more jobs per unit of energy produced and per dollar spent than fossil fuel technologies. The wind turbines and solar panels that produce green energy provide good-paying manufacturing jobs.
Lawmakers should back clean alternative fuels and stricter automobile and industrial emissions standards. Such a green energy policy means renewable energy and energy efficiency, both of which stabilize and reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
Government should institute a certification process for ensuring the production of alternative fuels in an ecologically and socially sustainable manner. Actually, any energy policy ought to be carefully managed and performance-based.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorized a variety of research, development and utilization incentives for biofuels. We should now seriously invest in more sustainable energy sources like wind and solar. By harnessing the energy derived from natural sources like sunlight and wind, we can generate clean, safe, renewable, affordable and reliable electric power without contributing to global warming pollution.
Scharnau teaches U.S. history at Northeast Iowa Community College, Peosta. His publications include journal articles on labor history in Dubuque and Iowa. Readers may comment on this feature via e-mail at doubletake@wcinet.com or by posting a comment below the article on THonline.com.
By Ralph Scharnau
full article
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment