With the cost of crude oil rocketing almost daily, companies and consumers alike are looking for a greener, cleaner, cheaper alternative
By Energy Digital
This debate has run in myriad directions. With the constant concern over the apparently finite crude oil supply, and the massive rise in prices, companies are exploring the alternatives. And each alternative seems to have its 15 minutes; a period of months or years when it is the fashionable choice.
From the mid-1950s right up to the 1980s, it was the turn of nuclear power: A new, exciting fuel source that was expected to make crude oil completely surplus to requirements.
The Chernobyl disaster in 1986, however, shrouded the whole technology in massive controversy, and severely limited the future development of nuclear power. Only recently has nuclear energy enjoyed a bit more widespread usage, but there are still calls for it to be phased out completely.
A case for renewables?
Below the surface, there has long been the argument for renewable fuels, driven largely by environmental concerns. This drive increased in speed after revelations in the 1970s that fuel burning, among other things, was releasing dangerous gases into the stratosphere that were causing significant ozone depletion.
This, to an extent, still carries a lot of weight in the alternative fuels debate, after studies over the last decade indicated that the release of CO2 – the so-called “greenhouse gas” – was contributing to the warming of the Earth’s surface.
This phenomenon, imaginatively titled “global warming”, led to a spate of government legislation and policy worldwide, as companies and people were encouraged to lower their carbon emissions and be friendlier to the environment.
But the main problem with all of these traditional renewable sources – such as solar, wind and hydroelectric – is that the cost of development in many cases is just too steep. The Hoover Dam, for example, at the time cost US$49 million – a figure that hits a staggering US$676 million if adjusted for today’s current level of inflation.
Add to that the fact that these renewable sources typically cannot produce as much energy as traditional fossil fuel equivalents, and you get an idea of the scale of issue at hand.
The biofuel alternative
In recent years it has been the turn of biofuels to take the spotlight.
Fuels created using biomass, if sustainable and renewable sources are used, carry all the same benefits as traditional renewable power, but potentially have far greater reach. Already, the transport industry is taking advantage of improvements to biofuel efficiency and making the alternative more available to the consumer.
One of the most appealing aspects of biofuel is that in various forms it can be burned in an existing diesel engine, making it an easily marketable option. And in many cases, it is also a cheaper option.
Consequently, it is starting to be taken up on a serious commercial level. Recently, Shell and Iogen announced a partnership to help develop the future of biofuels and ensure that the environmental impact of biogas, bioalcohol, biodiesel and so on is far less than existing fossil fuels.
Biofuels for the future?
Stringent research and clear objectives have meant that the future development of biofuels is fairly easily mapped.
The current stage of development in biofuels is commonly referred to as “first generation biofuels”, though Shell/Iogen (among others) have pledged to begin research and development on a “second generation”, which would result in biofuel implementation from non-food crops.
Beyond this, work has already begun on algae-based biofuel alternatives – a third generation that is generating more and more interest with the increase in fossil fuel prices. One of the greatest advantages to algae-based fuels (otherwise known as oilgae) is that it is fully biodegradable, and therefore entirely harmless to the environment if spilled.
However, the development of oilgae is estimated to be a very space-hungry activity. In fact, the US Department of Energy has said that if all the fuel in the US was replaced by oilgae, it would require 15,000 square miles of facilities – roughly the size of Maryland.
The step beyond this – the so-called “fourth generation” – is potentially the most exciting and most environmentally beneficial. Research is currently underway at California-based company Synthetic Genomics into the genetic engineering of microorganisms to produce fuel directly from carbon dioxide. If the development is successful, it is believed that this could be easily implemented on an industrial scale.
It is clear, therefore, that biofuels might be here to stay. While other alternative fuel sources, despite their obvious benefits, have failed to enjoy mainstream uptake, it may just be that biofuels can finally remove the global dependence on fossil fuels.
One final thing for consideration, however: if biofuels do indeed take off, countries that rely on fossil fuels as a major export will have to move fast to prevent a massive downturn in their economies. ¬