| |
Back to March/April 2005 Table
of Contents >>>
Chair's Corner
• • • March/April
2005
No War Required
 |
Tom Starrs |
I recently carpooled with a colleague to visit a potential solar
power project site. When he pulled up in his new Volkswagen
Passat, I noticed a sticker in the back window: “Biodiesel:
No War Required.”
Many SOLAR TODAY readers may
think of the American Solar Energy Society as promoting the
use of renewable energy only for power generation and building
applications. But ASES also has an active division, headed by
board member Paul Notari, promoting renewable fuels for transportation.
I take comfort in having ASES and its members engaged on this
topic. Although my own career has focused primarily on the application
of renewable technologies for electricity generation, I have
been frustrated at times that these technologies have little
to offer in addressing one of our most intractable long-term
economic, environmental and security problems: our dependence
on petroleum as a transportation fuel.
About 98 percent of the energy used for transportation in the
United States comes from oil. Regular readers of this column
will recall another key statistic: The United States is the
largest consumer of oil in the world. We consume over 20 million
barrels (840 million gallons) of petroleum products each day.
About two-thirds is used for transportation, whether by road,
rail, sea or air. The rest is used for building or industrial
heating and as a chemical feedstock.
More than half of the oil used in the United States is imported.
Oil imports are expected to increase to over 70 percent by 2025,
as U.S. reserves are further depleted. The amount being imported
from OPEC members, including the politically volatile Middle
East, will increase disproportionately — from about 40
percent of imports today to over 60 percent by 2025.
Our dependence on imported oil makes the United States
economically and strategically vulnerable. Payment
for overseas oil represents about one-third of the U.S. trade
deficit, and puts those dollars in the hands of foreign governments
(including those hostile to us). And any disruption in the flow
of overseas oil creates economic havoc — as the recent
escalation in oil prices affirmed. Our vulnerability will only
increase as global oil production peaks during the next few
decades, and the world’s governments fight for their pieces
of a shrinking pie.
The barriers to replacing existing power plants with renewable-fueled
alternatives are primarily economic: If the price of conventional
fossil-fueled generation increased fourfold overnight, we could
ramp up the deployment of alternative generating technologies
quickly. But the options for reducing our dependence on oil
are much more constrained. There simply are no readily available
alternatives — at any cost — for much of our current
transportation infrastructure.
One of the few exceptions is to use biomass fuels, or
“biofuels,” liquid fuels derived from crops
and other plant matter. Biofuels are produced domestically,
derived from renewable resources and have better environmental
characteristics than petroleum-based fuels.
One of these fuels, ethanol, is already widely used in the nation’s
gasoline supply. About 7 percent of the U.S. corn crop is used
to produce ethanol, and it displaces about 2 percent of U.S.
gasoline consumption. Ethanol-blended gasoline increases performance
and reduces emissions. It is seasonally mandated in some states
to help meet stringent air-pollution standards. Higher-percentage
ethanol blends (up to 85 percent) can be used if some modest
changes to vehicle fuel systems are made. However, ethanol from
corn is expensive (its production is heavily subsidized) and
the technology to produce it is mature. A more promising approach
is to produce ethanol from cellulosic biomass (fibrous or woody
plant materials). Though still in development, proponents believe
it can be produced for less than half the cost of corn ethanol,
making it potentially cost-competitive with gasoline production.
Biodiesel, though far less established in the market than ethanol,
has emerged as a popular alternative fuel. Produced primarily
from soybean or rapeseed oils or from recycled vegetable oils,
biodiesel also increases engine performance and dramatically
reduces air pollution compared to conventional diesel. Biodiesel
reduces carbon monoxide, hydrocarbon and particulate emissions,
essentially eliminates sulfur oxide and sulfate emissions, and
reduces net carbon dioxide emissions by 78 percent compared
to conventional diesel.
One of biodiesel’s biggest advantages is that it can be
used in most diesel engines without modification, even in a
100 percent formulation (called B100). Combined with the traditional
advantages of diesel engines, including long-term reliability
and high mileage, biodiesel-fueled cars offer substantially
reduced operating costs compared to gasoline-powered vehicles.
U.S. biodiesel production has nearly doubled in two years, from
15 million gallons in 2002 to about 30 million gallons in 2004.
It is the fastest-growing alternative fuel in the United States,
used in more than 400 vehicle fleets nationwide. Most biodiesel
is used in buses and trucks, primarily because only two major
auto manufacturers — DaimlerChrysler and Volkswagen —
sell diesel passenger vehicles in the United States.
DaimlerChrysler is actively promoting the use of biodiesel in
the United States and Europe. It announced last September that
it would fill the tanks of all its new Jeep Liberty vehicles
with B5, a 5 percent biodiesel blend. The company estimates
that biodiesel could provide up to 20 percent of the fuel for
diesel vehicles in Europe, where such vehicles are much more
common than in the United States.
Volkswagen is not actively promoting biodiesel, but its diesel-powered
passenger cars — both old and new — have become
a popular alternative to the Toyota Prius hybrid among environmentally
conscious customers. Biodiesel consumers note that diesels get
mileage comparable to hybrids, use proven technology and, when
run on B100, are “petroleum free.”
No single measure will significantly reduce our dependence
on petroleum in the near term. But a combination of
measures — including stricter fuel-efficiency standards,
greater deployment of hybrid and diesel vehicles, increased
domestic production of biofuels, improved public transit and
better transportation-related infrastructure — could be
combined to cut U.S. oil consumption in half, nearly eliminating
imports.
That would be good for the environment, good for the economy
and good for our nation’s security.
Thomas Starrs
|
