Skip to content

Biofuels vs Fossil Fuels

Biofuels are often described as better for the environment than fossil fuels, but the comparison needs care.The carbon-neutral argumentCrops absorb carbon dioxide from the air as they grow, by photosynthesis:
6CO2 + 6H2O → C6H12O6 + 6O2

Fermentation of the glucose releases 2 CO2:
C6H12O6 → 2C2H5OH + 2CO2

Burning the two ethanol molecules releases 4 CO2:
2C2H5OH + 6O2 → 4CO2 + 6H2O

Total released: 2 + 4 = 6 CO2, the same as the 6 absorbed. So in theory there is no net release of carbon dioxide: the fuel is carbon neutral. Fossil fuels release carbon that was locked away millions of years ago, which increases the CO2 in the atmosphere.Advantages of biofuels
Renewable; lower net CO2 emissions; little or no sulfur, so less SO2; biodiesel and biogas can use waste materials.Disadvantages of biofuels
They are not truly carbon neutral: energy, usually from fossil fuels, is used for farm machinery, making fertilisers, transport and distilling the ethanol.
Land used for fuel crops cannot grow food, which can raise food prices; forests may be cleared to make space, destroying habitats.
Ethanol releases less energy per litre than petrol, and older engines may need modifying to run on high blends.Fossil fuels give a lot of energy per kilogram and have a well-developed supply system, but they are finite and add CO2 to the atmosphere.

Read the text

Read the text and highlight anything you think is important. When you go on, the text is hidden and you answer from memory.