**1. Introduction**

On 1 January 2016, the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 Agenda—adopted by world leaders in September 2015 at an historic United Nations (UN) summit—officially came into force. Over the next fifteen years, with these new Goals that universally apply to all, countries mobilized efforts to end all forms of poverty, fight inequalities, and tackle climate change, while ensuring that no one is left behind [1].

Electrification of rural areas in developing countries is considered fundamental for reducing energy poverty and meeting the SDGs. Provision of electricity to rural areas through national grids is costly per unit of electricity because rural consumers are more scattered and typically buy less electricity per consumer compared to urban consumers. Rural households are assumed to consume at least 250 kWh per year and urban households 500 kWh per year.

Instead of bringing the national grid to rural consumers, community scale electricity production units may be a more realistic solution for supplying electricity at a reasonable cost per kWh, and biomass-based electricity generation is deemed to have potential [2,3].

The SDGs build on strategies that create economic growth and addresses a range of social needs including education, health, social protection, and job opportunities, while tackling climate change and environmental protection [1]. This paper analyzed the use of biofuels in systems and aimed mainly on six goals of the SDGs, depicted in Figure 1. These goals are interconnected to each other, because one supports the rest.

**Figure 1.** Contribution of this article to Sustainable Development Goals [1]. Source: Own results based on Reference [1].

Mitigating global climate change requires decarbonizing the electricity sector as it is a major source of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. With roughly half GHG emissions coming from coal-fired power plants, electricity from natural gas presents another alternative—a lower carbon technology. The optimal strategy for picking ideal technology will depend on the ultimate costs of each technology as well as the social costs from GHG emissions. These analyses are increasingly discussed in many countries around the world [4]. Based on The National Climate Assessment, in just the US, due to the change in climate, hundreds of billions of dollars are lost, mainly because of heat-related deaths, coastal property losses, and lost wages in outdoor industries due to the presence of heat waves [5,6]. Transition to lower carbon emission technologies will neither be cheap nor smooth; however, the status quo is still fairly expensive, even though the cost is not directly visible.

The introduction of alternative fuels is a logical step, which is continuously being done around the world. The first generation of alternative fuels introduced in large numbers comprised oilseed, sugarcane, and other oil containing food and animal feed crops. First generation bioethanol is mainly produced from sugar containing plants or cereal (grain) crops. Vegetable oils are also used after a range of conversion to fatty acid methyl or ethyl esters. Even though, second, third, and fourth generation are currently under research both by commercial and scientific circles, first generation is still the main representative of alternative fuels [7].

This paper focused on the use of *Jatropha curcas* as a potentially useful source of renewable energy, which was discussed in October 2008 in the European Parliament. The proposal was that one-fifth of energy should come from non-food-related alternatives. Because this crop does not compete with food production, it can become a choice for assessment by international investors and biodiesel processors, energy producers and international institutions. In addition, it would be appropriate to support oilseeds which do not compete with food crops with certain subsidy incentives for areas, particularly in developing countries, because of employment policy.

The paper is organized as follows: Section 2 provides a short literature review. Section 3 focuses on the materials and methods used in our study. Section 4 presents the results and discussions. Finally, Section 5 concludes by summarizing the main findings and implications.
