From French Fries to Sustainable Energy

(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.