Two new policies that include accounting for how United States corn ethanol production affects land use in other countries worry biofuel industry supporters.
The system is called indirect land use accounting and is based on the idea that producing corn for ethanol in the U.S. causes farmers in other countries to clear land to grow more crops.
In April, the California Air Resources Board voted nine-to-one in favour of a low carbon fuel standard to take effect in 2011 that would reduce greenhouse gas fuel emissions by 10 percent by 2020.
Read Also
University of Manitoba hires potato researcher
A new research chair position at the University of Manitoba will tackle sustainability in the potato industry.
The regulation includes a penalty for corn ethanol that some in the biofuel industry believe would effectively ban it from being used in California.
Biofuel and agricultural groups condemned the standard.
“This decision will be harmful to our national economy,” said National Corn Growers Association president Bob Dickey.
“We may lose a tremendous opportunity to spur economic growth in agricultural communities.”
Under the California model, corn ethanol would be penalized based on the assumption that growing corn for ethanol in the United States causes deforestation and other environmentally unfriendly agricultural practices in other parts of the world. Some say the penalty would be stiff enough to drive ethanol out of the California marketplace.
However, the ramifications are broader than that because British Columbia, Ontario and states in the northeastern U.S. are developing standards based on the California model.
Indirect land use has also become a national issue in the U.S. On May 5, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its life cycle analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from renewable fuel.
It determined corn ethanol made at facilities using natural gas dry mills reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 61 percent compared to gasoline. However, that number drops to 16 percent when indirect land use is calculated.
The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 states new corn ethanol plants need to produce fuel with a minimum 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to gasoline to qualify for the renewable fuel standard program.
The California and the EPA analyses are subject to review.
The California Air Resources Board is convening an expert group to refine and improve its indirect land use analysis before the standard takes effect in 2011.
The EPA has said it plans to conduct peer reviews of key components of its analysis between now and the final rule.
Gordon Quaiattini, president of the Canadian Renewable Fuels Association, is confident the reviews will result in more favourable numbers for the biofuel industry.
He said that if governments want to stick with the indirect land use calculations, they better start calculating indirect emissions for all competitive fuel.
“Before you go ahead and apply additional regulation to our industry, then you better be looking at other renewable energy sectors, and more importantly, you better be looking at fossil fuel energy,” he said.
Canadian connection
Canada hasn’t attached minimum greenhouse gas emission requirements to its pending biofuel mandates, but Ontario and British Columbia have signed agreements with California in which they would commit to match or adopt the state’s low carbon fuel standard.
Quaiattini said both provinces have made it clear they will do their own work when it comes to assessing greenhouse gas emissions and both are aware of the scientific shortcomings of the indirect land use argument. He isn’t afraid of what they will come up with.
“In fact, it’s quite the opposite. We certainly look at low carbon fuel standards as further opportunity to expand the use of renewables.”
Both provinces have indicated they want a standard in place by 2010. Quaiattini suspects B.C. will be the only one that meets that objective.
