(Or Pollution/Purification/Redemption through Biodiesel)
The first-generation feedstock for the production of
biodiesel in the United States is virgin soybean oil- oil that is processed as
if for food consumption but never makes it to the fryer. Instead it is reacted with methanol to form
biodiesel.
Many believe that first-generation biofuels, “…could cause
more problems than they solve,” such as
engendering food versus fuel conflicts and creating domestic fuel production
through overproduction of domestic farmland (Kleiner, 2008, p. 9). But second-generation biodiesel technologies
seek to overcome this barrier through the production of biodiesel from waste
grease. In this sort of process, the
feedstock becomes the used oil from restaurant fryers (called yellow grease) or
the truly disgusting contents of sewer traps (called brown grease).
 |
| Brown Grease (source: www.ncfuturefuels.com) |
This is the technology that I worked on for four years in my
previous career. And I can speak from
experience in saying that the sales pitch practically writes itself. Take two parts green energy, one part technological
innovation, one part triumphant rebuttal to reactionary pro-petroleum
arguments, and a dash of catharsis from the guilt of over eating fried
foods. Biodiesel made from waste grease
is a marketer’s dream.
Kenneth Burke’s rhetoric
of rebirth establishes the framework that is well-used in proclaiming the
utility of second-generation biodiesel.
There are three steps in this process:
pollution, purification, and redemption, which stem from the form of hierarchy produced from human
rhetoric. The natural progression from
our use of symbols is that we have formed images of the negative and perfection,
neither of which exists in nature.
Language allows us to see the negative
as a failure to live up to the perfect idea embodied in a symbol; here, the perfect
idea of sustainability is countered by the negative
of our failure to generate energy for our society without also causing problems. If there is a negative, there clearly must be a perfection to counter it, to strive for
at the top of a hierarchy. With energy,
we have the far-off (probably never achievable) perfection of generating energy for any activity imaginable without producing detrimental side consequences.
Thus guilt, and from guilt, pollution. With biodiesel,
there are clearly multiple sources of pollution. We know we are reliant on oil far too much, a guilt that leads to the positive feelings that originally surrounded first-generation biodiesel. But even
biodiesel boosters must admit that first-generation biodiesel is an imperfect
solution. Only so much of it can be
produced, and even at low levels there is an inherent tension to the idea of
taking a food product and burning it to drive to the store or sit in
traffic. Burke sees pollution as having a direct link to human excrements, but perhaps
in this situation it is embodied through the environmental pollution coming
from car tailpipes, as well as the lack of sustenance going to hungry people
around the world.
Once the guilt of inadequate energy sourcing has created pollution, we move on to attempt to find
purification. Biodiesel from waste greases acts through victimage to give us purification from our guilt. In this symbolic act, guilt is transferred to
a scapegoat, an outside vessel that takes on our pollution and frees us from it.
In this case, producing biodiesel from waste grease allows us to put our
guilt on the ‘out-dated’ concepts of first generation biofuels. It is not the production of bio-alternatives to petroleum that is inefficient or or wasteful or hunger-inducing. It is the idea that we should be producing
biofuels from virgin foodstuffs. We can tell ourselves, 'Now, if we produced
biofuels from wastes instead, we would be on to something.' We might even get some additional purification from our American habit of
over-feeding ourselves. Now eating an
extra-large French fries becomes a necessary deed, as it provides the substance
for fueling our vehicles. By making a
formerly embraced idea (first-generation biodiesel) a scapegoat, we purify ourselves and make progress.
And progress results in the third stage of the rhetoric of rebirth: redemption. Burke was clear to define redemption as only a temporary stopping
place. It creates a feeling, “of moving
forward, towards a goal” (Foss et al., 2002, p. 211) This is what
we realize when we contemplate the specifics of making biodiesel from waste
greases. It may bring about large
greenhouse gas reductions, it may not threaten food supplies, and it may make
us feel prouder of what we put in our cars. But it is only a temporary
stopping point. While the amount of
grease available for processing is far larger than most laymen would imagine (Wiltsee, 1998),
it cannot replace all of our transportation fuels. We have to do more, but reaching this stage
is a victory for us. It is a redemption
from the dirtiness of fossil fuels, from the confused and contradictory
messages surrounding first-generation biofuels, and from the guilt we have over
our energy usage.
Burke’s idea of a rhetoric
of rebirth was predicated on the idea that the hierarchies through which we
live are thoroughly human concepts, created by our symbols and distinctly apart
from the physical world. This raises the
question of what it is truly worth to move through the rebirth
process. Why should we bother struggling
with whether or not second-generation biofuels provide a better energy
source? Something is just going to end
up burned anyway, and ‘better’ is only valid if we all agree on the same
hierarchy. But this misses the point of
Burke’s analysis of rhetoric. To him,
rhetoric makes us human. To keep our
humanity, we have to struggle through our hierarchies, our pollution, our
redemption. This is an important point to remember as we debate how to move to a better energy future. The steps may seem small and the
qualifications byzantine, as in the question of making better biodiesel. But struggling through this process is what
allows us to keep a grip on our culture and what we have created.
Foss, Sonja K.; Foss, Karen A.; and Trapp, Robert. Contemporary Perspectives on Rhetoric. Waveland Press. Prospect Heights, Illinois. 2002.
Kleiner, Kurt. The
Backlash Against Biofuels. Nature Reports
Climate Change. Volume 2, January 2008.
Wiltsee, G. Urban Waste Grease Resource Assessment. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. November1998.
