Jessica Curran, Grade 11

As gas prices reach disconcerting heights and the energy crisis becomes more severe, the discussion surrounding alternative sources of energy only gains popularity. With the realization that fossil fuels are no longer economically viable and are environmentally harmful, attention is turned toward a more sustainable energy source — biofuels. Biofuels, most commonly ethanol and biodiesel, are produced from organic matter such as crops, wood, and sewage (1,2). Given its contents are made of renewable resources, biofuels in theory can be produced indefinitely unlike their fossil fuels counterpart. In addition to sustainability, biofuels have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 41% in place of fossil fuels (3). However promising these benefits appear to be, they should not cause the potential environmental drawbacks to be overlooked. Although biofuel usage can mitigate GHG emissions, the downsides, to be discussed later on, in the production process may counteract any positive outcomes. Biofuel research is certainly a step in the right direction toward environmental improvement. Yet, it is important to consider prospective consequences of biofuel implementation as the environment may end up worse off. These evaluations lead to the question: To what extent should America increase production of and access to biofuels? Further scrutiny from an environmental standpoint will find there are several concerns regarding biofuel production including deforestation and harmful agricultural practices. Until environmental concerns are addressed and improved upon only then should biofuel production become readily available.
One of the driving factors that makes biofuel production less appealing from an environmental standpoint is the detrimental effects of deforestation. Deforestation is the deliberate clearing of forested land without proper reforestation (4). The biofuel feedstock, in the form of crops, requires mass amounts of farmland majorly contributing to deforestation (5). The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has found that roughly 62% of deforestation is a result of clearing space for farmland expansion and that value is expected to drastically increase if biofuel production is fully embraced (5). Trees are vital to the carbon cycle and cutting or burning down forests for agricultural land releases mass amounts of carbon dioxide back into the atmosphere contributing to global warming (6). This results in a carbon debt as just preparing for the production of biofuels results in a net positive of GHG emissions justifying the concern that the production process will only feed global warming further despite its intentions.
Another environmental effect of biofuel production is harmful agricultural practices utilized to grow first-generation feedstock such as corn and soy. As crop demand intensifies so does the use of fertilizers, however, this is not without caveats regarding the environment. Fertilizers are infested with nitrogen as it is a necessary component in plant growth, but this ultimately pollutes the ecosphere in the form of N2O and NOx gasses (8,7). These gasses contribute considerably to climate change as nitrous oxide is 300 times more effective at trapping heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide (9). Nitrogen pollution as caused by fertilizer use is detrimental not only to global warming but additionally to aquatic ecosystems. Nitrogen, in the form of nitrate, is absorbed by bodies of water consequently overstimulating the algae. When these plants decompose, oxygen is depleted creating dead zones disrupting the ecological foundation that was once there (10). If biofuel production is to be taken into effect, increased use of fertilizers will contribute to climate change and disrupt aquatic ecosystems. As biofuel production aspirations continue, as will the environmental deterioration.
Even though biofuel production can feed into existing environmental problems such as deforestation and poor agricultural practices, it can assist in mitigating others. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has found that the total municipal waste produced in 2018 was 292.4 million tons and has drastically increased since the effects of COVID-19 (11, 12). Municipal waste can be detrimental to the environment creating complications such as hazardous gas emissions, water contamination, and biodegradation (13). However, second-generation biofuels — derived from municipal and agricultural wastes — can alleviate these issues by reducing the copious amounts of waste to create energy. Producing second-generation biofuels from waste is preferable as it does not require any additional farmland and leaves a minimal environmental impact. The production of first-generation biofuels, edible crops, is not as reasonable when considering a significant portion of crops is designated for energy production rather than direct consumption. It would be inadvisable to create even more farmland as this would contribute to the listed environmental determinants. The environment should have a net gain when adopting biofuel production as opposed to unintentionally contributing to existing problems. On the surface level, biofuel use is encouraged as it can reduce GHG emissions and mitigate global warming, however, if the production process proves otherwise it may not be sensible. Further biofuel research is required to scope out additional complications the environment may face if biofuel production is fully embraced. The U.S. Department of Energy has funded 35 bioenergy research projects totaling 73 million dollars as they are aware that environmental success will only come by deliberate action (14).
From an environmental standpoint, biofuel production can be harmful regarding deforestation and agricultural practices. After understanding the downsides of biofuel production, one would think it would be beneficial to not implement production in the first place. However, biofuels offer more environmentally friendly potential compared to their fossil fuel counterparts which are too great not to exploit. The optimal course of action would be to create energy while neither redirecting any land from growing food nor damaging the environment. Encouraging the production of second-generation biofuels is heavily suggested as it meets these requirements providing the desired environmental benefits while avoiding the detriments. Biofuels have massive potential to succeed with further research but can just as easily be our downfall if we invest too much in them too soon without proper consideration.

Citations:
(1) Bioenergy Technologies Office. (n.d.). Biofuel basics. Energy.gov.
(2) National Geographic Society. (2022, May 20). Renewable resources. National Geographic.
(3) Refaat, A.A. (2012). Biofuels from waste materials. ScienceDirect, 5(13), 217-261. doi:10.1016/B978-0-08-087872-0.00518-7
(4) National Geographic Society. (2022, May 20). Deforestation. National Geographic.
(5) United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (2007, October). UNFCCC: Investment and financial flows to address climate change. UNFCCC.
(6) Dean, A. (2019, August 21). Deforestation and climate change. Climate Council.
Good, A. G., & Beatty, P. H. (2011). Fertilizing nature: A tragedy of excess in the commons. PubMed Central, 9(8). doi.:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001124
(7) Liu, C.-W., Sung, Y., Chen, B.-C., & Lai, H.-Y. (2014). Effects of nitrogen fertilizers on the growth and nitrate content of lettuce (Lactuca sativa l.). PubMed Central, 11(4). doi:10.3390/ijerph110404427
(8) Ng, E. L., Chen, D., & Edis, R. (n.d.). Nitrogen pollution: The forgotten element of climate change. The Conversation.
(9) United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2022, January 31). The effects: Dead zones and harmful algal blooms. EPA.
(10) United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2020). National overview: Facts and figures on materials, wastes, and recycling. EPA.
(11) Filho, W. L., Voronova, V., Kloga, M., Paco, A., Minhas, A., Salvia, A. L., & Ferreira, C. D. (2021). COVID-19 and waste production in household: A trend analysis. PubMed Central. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145997
(12) Filho, W. L., Voronova, V., Kloga, M., Paco, A., Minhas, A., Salvia, A. L., & Ferreira, C. D. (2021). COVID-19 and waste production in household: A trend analysis. PubMed Central. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.145997
(13) CMAP. (2013, September 18). Impacts of municipal solid waste. CMAP.
(14) Bioenergy Technologies Office. (n.d.). Department of Energy announces $73 million for 35 projects for bioenergy research and development. Energy.gov.