Body and Conclusion of the about Biodisel - Research Paper Example

Significance of the Study In the recent past, UN together with international organizations has fueled research projects aimed at evaluating various aspects of environmental changes today. One of the aspects on the research priority revolves around the element of environmental temperature changes, specifically referred to as global warming. Through their research, leading climate scientists supplement environmental conservationists with updated report of immediate and forecasted temperature changes. On March 2014, a group of research personnel under the committee named Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released a landmark and award-winning report on global warming. According to the credit-deserving report, global warming is an imminent environmental threat that poses grave danger to the global population, and if left unchecked, can lead to conflicts and mass migration. With that forecasted perspective, the panel was also outright in asserting that rise in atmospheric temperatures, which causes global warming, results from human activities. This means that effects of global warming can be prevented by adopting efficient environmental conservation measures. The authoritative report from IPCC mentioned that global warming can be reduced significantly through abandoning the use of gasoline and other dirty fossil fuels. Burning of fossil fuels for energy production produces carbon dioxide (CO2) nitrogen dioxide (NO2) and other greenhouse gases. In conventional situations, approximately 70% of all fossil fuels find application in powering of automobile. The other 30% is used in electricity generation and manufacture of plastics (Sakunthala and Vijay 1570). Technically, CO2 and other related gases prevent heat from escaping into the outer layers of the atmosphere. In addition, it re-radiates the heat evenly to all parts of the world. The more carbon dioxide released, the more heat trapped and re-radiated. On the other hand, increase in consumption of fossil fuels translated into a corresponding increase in the volume of CO2 and other greenhouse gases present in the atmosphere. Undeniably, fossil fuels are not the only source of CO2 in the atmosphere. However, when compared to other sources like volcanic eruptions, the fuels produce the largest volume of the greenhouse gas that causes global warming. Based on the premise that fossil fuels accounts for a substantial portion of greenhouse gases, IPCC recommended that the only way to counteract and mitigate global warming it to use renewable energy. Amongst the recommended renewable energy sources include solar, biodiesel fuels and hydropower. Industrialists and other heavy fuel users usually scorn such recommendations and choose the pursuit of economic goals at the expense of environmental conservations. This caused a situation where industrialized nations like China and the US emits more CO2 than 3rd World nations. However, the effects of global warming are evenly distributed across the globe as opposed to being proportionately distributed according to the amount of CO2 that a nation emits. Based on this reality, world governments convened and deliberated on a way forward. In 2009, a panel of international leaders and experts agreed to collectively limit the rate of increase of global temperature. In this regard, reduction of greenhouse gases is a collective responsibility that all nations must support or risk experiencing a share of eventual consequences. Currently, industrialized nations like the US and UK are integrating the use of alternative fuels into their economies. US states like Texas have mandatory requirements for fossil fuels to be blended with a significant volume of biodiesel. This shows that responsible governmental authorities have already started contributing into the basket of collective responsibility against increase in global temperature. One factor which hinders campaigns for overhaul of fossil fuels is insignificant effects of global warming in immediate contexts (Katia et al 07). The effect of conflicts and mass migrations are not yet. This explains why IPCC and other leading environmental campaign groups have severally been labeled as extreme conservatives. However, these groups remain assertive that alternative fuels are the only reliable and affordable alternative to the dirty fossil fuels. Technical Background of Biodiesel At this juncture, one may ask; why biodiesel? Technically, there are other alternative fuels like methanol, hydrogen and ethanol which can replace fossil fuels. However, all the aforementioned fuels emit substantial amounts of regulated emissions, hence will either aggravate the global warming issue of cause other pollution problems. As an alternative fuel, biodiesel meets all regulatory requirements. Its lack of sulfur coupled with infinite amount of greenhouse gases in its combustion fumes qualifies biodiesel as the best option and remedy against global warming. Unlike gasoline which emits a black smoke, biodiesel burns cleanly (Lewis 03). After combustion, fossil fuels emit a range of unburned hydrocarbons which produces a synergistic effect of increasing global temperature. Unburned hydrocarbons from fossil fuels combine with reactive radicals in the atmosphere forming persistent and non-biodegradable greenhouse gases like chlorofluorocarbons. On the contrary, biodiesel exhaust contains virtually no unburned hydrocarbons. Apart from the above mentioned benefits of biodiesel, it is worth acknowledging the fact that the fuel comes from vegetable oils. Agricultural production of the plants for the vegetable oil provides an avenue through which high volumes of carbon dioxide can be consumed. Before industrialization and massive consumption of fossil fuels, levels of CO2 remained within safe and harmless levels. Natural sinks like forests and other vegetation consumed CO2 during photosynthesis; hence balancing the gas’ levels. Currently, the natural sink of forest and vegetation cover can no longer balance CO2 levels because there is excess addition of the gas into the atmosphere. Increasing vegetation will lead to increased consumption of CO2. In this regard, jatropha plants used in production of biodiesel provides the additional vegetation cover needed to reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere. This constitutes an act of killing two birds with a single stone. In this context, use of biodiesel is appropriate in mitigating the global warming because it is not only less polluting but also renewable. In opposition against overhaul of fossil fuels, critics mentioned that biodiesel is a big contributor of nitrogen oxides (NOX) in the atmosphere. Inside the engine’s combustion chambers, biodiesel combustion releases heat that induces side reactions. One of the side reactions involves formation of nitrogen oxides after combination of molecular nitrogen and molecular oxygen under high temperatures of fuel combustion. Nitrogen oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are not greenhouse gases. However, NO2 combines with ozone (O3) leading to decline in protective properties of the atmosphere. Ozone is responsible for prevention of harmful radiation (Maina 6). O3 traps and deny carcinogenic radiation from reaching the earth’s surface. Based on this revelation, it holds that biodiesel also contributes to emission of harmful gases into the atmosphere. Inasmuch as ozone depletion is also a matter of priority, it is worth acknowledging the fact that the issue at hand revolves around global warming as opposed to health impacts of fuel fumes. In this case, benefits of biodiesel as a remedy to increase in global temperature take precedence over other air pollution aspects. Research Hypotheses a. Alternate Hypothesis Based on the claim that biodiesel can reduce carbon dioxide emission; hence addressing the issue of global warming, it is appropriate to evaluate such a statement from a research based perspective. The underlying hypothesis contains dependent variable-improved air pollution and the independent variable-increased use of biodiesel fuel. This section strives to establish the relationship between the two variables, thus warranting either an approval or a disapproval of the hypothesis. Technically, all hydrocarbon based fuels like biodiesel and gasoline emit carbon oxides. With complete combustion, biodiesel releases only the amount of carbon dioxide that the parent plants absorbed from the atmosphere. On the other hand, gasoline converts all its carbon atoms in the fuel into carbon dioxide upon complete combustion. In order to substantiate the difference in CO2 emission, one report carried out a combustion analysis. After the analysis, results presented in graphical form plotted the variables of CO2 emitted against load of vehicle. At 25% load capacity, a vehicle running on gasoline produced approximately 40 mg/m3 of CO2. At 70% load capacity, the same vehicle on gasoline produced 82 mg/m3 of CO2. On the contrary, a vehicle on biodiesel produces 4 mg/m3 and 8 mg/m3 CO2 at load capacities of 25% and 70% respectively (Maina 5). Volume of NO2 emissions for both fuels demonstrated infinite variability. The volume of ozone depleting NO2 from biodiesel was similar to that of gasoline. However, the two fuels differed substantially on the amount of CO2 released after combustion. While gasoline generated 40 mg/m3, biodiesel released only 4 mg/m3, both at the same load capacity. With increased load capacity, there was a corresponding increase in CO2 emission. However, CO2 from biodiesel remained substantially low as compared to that of gasoline. Based on the above findings, it is undeniable that use of biodiesel as a fuel reduces CO2 emission; hence causing a decline in air pollution. b. Null Hypothesis In justifying the alternate hypothesis, this research paper contains a contradicting null hypothesis which claims that biodiesel cannot reduce air pollution. Undeniably, biodiesel produces approximately 70% less carbon dioxide compared to conventional fossil fuels. However, biodiesel generates approximately 2% more NO2 compared to fossil fuels (Lewis 89). NO2 is a harmful pollutant which poses serious health impact to humans. Unlike CO2 and its global warming effects which are future oriented, increase in NO2 cause immediate danger to persons in form of respiratory complications. In addition, NO2 is a precursor for depletion of ozone layer; hence responsible for the increase of carcinogenic radiations reaching the earth’s surface. Inasmuch as biodiesel reduces CO2 emission, it does not address general concerns of air pollution, especially because it increases emission of NO2 into the atmosphere (Katia et al 04). Still on the null hypothesis, carbon dioxide levels will continue to rise with or without the use of fossil fuels. In the past, there was vast vegetation cover which adequately provided a sink for natural CO2. Currently, deforestation and human encroachment has lead to decrease in forest cover (Sakunthala and Vijay 1567). Apart from the issue of deforestation, it is worth mentioning that biological process of metabolism features as one natural source of CO2. With increasing human and animal population, there is a corresponding increase in CO2 emission from animals’ metabolic processes. In this context, there are two synergistic problems; the increase in human population and subsequent decrease in vegetation cover (McCarl and Szulezyk 56). Even with adoption of biodiesel, increasing metabolism and reduction in natural sinks will sustain the imbalanced levels of CO2 in the atmosphere. Therefore, use of biodiesel will reduce but will not eliminate air pollution. Counterargument Biodiesel production and consumption also faces new criticism regarding the conflict between food production and fuel production. Developed nations are encouraging production of renewable fuels like ethanol and biodiesel. Increased use of land to grow plants for these fuels will eventually compromise on food security. With annual increase in demand and supply of renewable fuels, concerned parties are worried that biodiesel and ethanol will eventually leave some people hungry. After a substantial portion of productive land has been diverted to production of biodiesel, the little land left will yield insufficient produces. Limited supply of food means increased demand, which is a recipe for inflation of food products. Therefore, renewable fuels like biodiesel threaten the global population on aspect of food security. Conclusion In conclusion, one can appreciate the fact that biodiesel features as an alternative fuel which can effectively mitigate effects of global warming. Biodiesel generates less carbon dioxide compared to conventional fossil fuels. Increased use of biodiesel coupled with abandonment of fossil fuels leads to substantial reduction in CO2 emission into the atmosphere; hence decrease in the rate of global temperature rise. Despite presence of environmental, economic and social shortcomings with biodiesel, it is undeniable that the fuel’s benefits outweigh its disadvantages. Works Cited Katia, Regina, Molica Fabricio, Rogerio Valle and Souza, Pontes. “Environmental and Socioeconomic Analysis of Producing Biodiesel from used cooking oil in Rio de Janeiro: Application and implementation.” Journal of Industrial Ecology 0.01 (2012): 2-10. http://web.b.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=70bedf1d-0d78-4bba-b18c-794042acc6e0%40sessionmgr112&vid=4&hid=103 Lewis, David. “Biodiesel: Cultivating alternative fuels.” Environmental Health Perspectives 115.2 (2007): 87-91. Print. Maina, Paul. “Engine Emissions and Combustion Analysis of Biodiesel from East African Countries.” South African Journal of Science 110.4 (2014): 1-8. Print. McCarl, Bruce and Szulezyk, Kenneth. “Market Penetration of Biodiesel. International Journal of Energy and Environment” 1.1 (2010): 53-68. http://web.a.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=7c86c82f-35fd-4025-ad8c-dd3978368002%40sessionmgr4001&vid=4&hid=4209 Sakunthala, Sridevi and Vijay, Kumar. “Biodiesel-Renewable Fuel: Environmental Implications and its Handling.” Journal of Chemical, Biological and Physical Sciences (2013): 1564-1571. Print. Read More