The Biofuel Question

I have done tons of research on biofuel and have encountered some very interesting information. No matter how much research I conduct, I will not be awarded any fancy PhD or anything; however, I definitely feel very informed in this subject. Heck, I have even composed a file of roughly seventy pages that outline different areas of biofuel technology.

A biofuel is a form of alternative energy that is grown from crops and can be used in place of fossil fuels. Because biofuels are essentially grown from the ground, they are considered to be a renewable resource. The United States federal government currently provides several incentives for industries to produce biofuels. In fact, the diesel fuel at your typical gas station is a blend of both petroleum diesel and biodiesel. Biodiesel is a biofuel because it is made from vegetable oil that goes through a transestrification process. But it is not just diesel engines that use biofuel. Unleaded gasoline is typically mixed with ethanol. These blends some of which have been governmentally mandated, have tried to reduce our oil dependency; however, they nearly scrape the surface of the problem.

For one, straight vegetable oil as a biofuel has been prohibited by the federal government. The Environmental Protection Agency through the Clean Air Act has established standards that make it illegal to fuel your vehicle off straight vegetable oil (SVO). However, many Americans use SVO illegally and several citizens from other countries have used SVO quite successfully. Several tests have been conducted in Japan which indicate that Straight Vegetable Oil is a environmentally healthy form of fuel…and what’s more it is practically free. Restaurants dump millions of gallons of vegetable oil into landfills which can further harm the environment. When vegetable oil is discarded, it is often referred to as waste vegetable oil. As a result, most restaurants will happily give you their waste vegetable oil free of charge.

Before I go any further it must be said that straight vegetable oil is not the easiest of biofuels to use. While any diesel engine can technically use vegetable oil, it is strongly discouraged. Unlike biodiesel, vegetable oil risks gumming up engines causing permanent corrosive damage when placed directly into engines. However, there is a way around this. Diesel engines can be equipped with a separate engine such as a greasecar kit that allows diesel vehicles to successfully run of straight vegetable oil. These kits are typically not very expensive and prevent any problems of losing engine life.

Probably the biggest advantage of vegetable oil is that vegetable oil reduces global warming because they run off of the closed carbon cycle. This means that the vegetable oils will emit simply what has already been absorbed by the plants. On the other hand, fossil fuels emit dormant carbon dioxide causing a net gain in carbon dioxide.

After looking at both the numerous advantages as well as the disadvantages of biofuels, I have come to the conclusion that biofuels provide an excellent source of energy for America.

Is biofuel a silver bullet to solve the energy crisis? Probably not. Nonetheless, if biofuel can at least minimize the burden Americans place on fossil fuels, why should we neglect to pursue additional biofuels?

Time to Consult Nader!

The elections are coming up sooner than ever and in addition to Obama and McCain a third candidate is getting some weight, Ralph Nader. Most people have essentially waved Ralph Nader off as joke candidate. While he may or may not be a joke as a candidate, some of his views are of huge importance. In fact, I would argue that Ralph Nader is someone that the United States should seriously consider consulting. Ralph Nader is an experienced lawyer and has already run for President four times before making him a prominent political figure. His view would be vital in areas where he has had strong stances on especially involving environmental issues. Consulting Nader could help convince conservative hardliners to moderate their stances or at least compromise on some issues that the United States federal government has been trying to pass, but failed due to right-wing opposition. One issue of paramount importance involves alternative energy incentives. The federal government should start consulting Nader over domestic policies to provide a fresh perspective on issues that can only be found outside of Washington.

Now more than ever the federal government must seriously consider the views of Green Party/Independent activist Ralph Nader. The energy crisis is something that can be postponed no longer. We have seen the concerns and predictions that Nader has been heralding all along become a reality. We look outside the car window and notice that the gas station is charging us over four dollars for a gallon of unleaded gas! To say that this is a crisis that should continue to go unnoticed is absurd. Hybrid vehicles that combine standard gasoline with other fuels have helped reduce our oil dependency, but it does not go far enough. It is clear that the United States federal government should adopt greater incentives for consumers using alternative energies. Who better to consult over capitalizing such ideals into policy than Ralph Nader? He has been extremely adamant about the need for establishing a new diversified energy policy.

Don’t get my wrong, I by no means plan on voting for Nader in 2008; however, he has some important views on issues and if I had the opportunity to sit down and talk to him on environmental issues I would do so in a heartbeat. Unfortunately, I do not have such a luxury, whereas the United States federal government does. Yet lawmakers, who have the potential to make serious change in United States energy policy refuse to even listen to Nader. Members of both the Democrat and Republican parties should realize the problem associated with depleting non-renewable natural resources. If people of power are not going to ignore how vital this issue is, then hopefully Nader once consulted could at least convince a few more heads to turn in the right direction.

This may seem absurd for the most powerful political body in the United States to consult someone like Nader, but let’s not forget that it has been done before. While normally someone such as the President consults his Cabinet or other prominent advisers in Washington, it is not too unusual to see people or organizations outside of Washington to be consulted over policy issues. In fact, consultations with Nader are nothing new. Jimmy Carter consulted Nader over assigning advisers when discussing the makeup of the Executive. The consultations I propose are not nearly to that extreme. The make-up of Washington is fine as it is, but could use a word of advice and Nader might be just the one to do it.

If the United States federal government were to consult him, it would certainly legitimize him in the political arena. This may in turn give him some additional support in the November 2008 election. It is unclear, however, whether he will gain enough support to steal a victory from Obama. Nonetheless, it is still a concern that should be considered.

References:
CNN News, June 6, 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/06/06/poll.mccain.obama/index.html?iref=newssearch

“Green Party 2008 Presidential Candidate Questionnaire,” February 3, 2008

Marcello, Patricia Cronin. Ralph Nader: A Biography pg. 82