Fuel… Integration or Substitution?
Mohammed Ahmed Al-Feelabi
(Environmental Specialist)
Most people realize that giant oil companies are aware of the catastrophic effects of fossil fuels, and that they have been working for decades to mislead public opinion regarding the risks of fossil fuels on climate change.
They have also succeeded in deceiving politicians, and taking them hostage with false information to push them to question science, hence causing delay in taking the necessary procedures, or to divert the matter from the attention of decision-makers by attracting corrupt scientists and media professionals.
Fossil fuels of three types, coal, oil and natural gas, have advantages represented in their ease of access and cheap price compared to alternative energy, in addition to the fact that many infrastructures are designed to use these types, despite the negative effects of their use, as the problems of climate change, global warming, oil spills, pollution, ocean acidification and others have become a real concern.
Sudan, like other similar countries, suffers from the fact that most of its mining fields and processing sites are located in vital areas, whether forests, pastures or agricultural plains, in addition to human settlements that are affected by refining and processing operations.
The Nile itself, along with many other waterways, has not escaped the highly toxic residues of these operations, causing lung diseases, cancers and kidney failure to spread among citizens, and women suffer from miscarriages, fetal deformities and infertility as a result of exposure to these pollutants, in light of the companies’ reluctance to provide what can be described as compensation.
Giant oil companies have continued to practice ignorance, deception and polarization despite the apparent effects, while the efforts of environmental activists have not succeeded in light of governments that ally with companies against their citizens, and work to ignore the laws and impose the law of private interests.
Studies show that a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions come from cars, trucks, airplanes, and factory machines that use fossil fuels, so scientists continue to search for ways to provide biofuels derived from plant and animal materials.
On another level, technologies have emerged to produce fuel from waste, inedible crops, or forest products in what is called advanced biofuels, or “second generation”, which is likely to become the main form of biofuel in the future, as its sustainability can be improved.
Due to its nature, it has been combined with other types of fossil fuels to reduce carbon emissions.
This has been successful in Brazil, where advanced cars run on ethanol.
The question remains: Is it possible, in light of these efforts, to adopt strategies of integration or substitution, or to work with both options until stakeholders are satisfied?