In 2007 the United States Congress passed a biofuels mandate that required the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a rule for how ethanol emissions would be calculated. The EPA did just that, and on Friday, August 7, 2009, a peer review from a four-member panel was released that said the EPA did a “fair job” of estimating the role the United States biofuels industry plays in increasing emissions overseas.The rule the EPA developed is certainly not without its opponents. The rule requires ethanol producers to meet “tougher lifecycle assessment for greenhouse gas emissions.” According to the SustainableBusiness.com article reprinted by Reuters:
Additionally, the Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) argues the deck was stacked against them by the EPA because the agency chose members to be on the panel who are “anti-ethanol.” However, one member of the panel did question the adequacy of the current modeling methods for establishing new regulations.
The ethanol industry objected to the rule proposed in May that would take into account land-use changes in other parts of the world resulting from the shift of U.S. agriculture land to production of ethanol feedstocks. The land-use provision suggests that the transfer of forest land to agriculture land should be accounted for in the lifecycle greenhouse gas footprint associated with the production of ethanol.
The 2007 Congressional mandate called for increased blending of ethanol into gasoline by 36 billion gallons by 2022. The law also requires corn-based ethanol to “emit 20% less greenhouse gas than gasoline.” The rule is running into opposition from lawmakers who represent agricultural districts where corn is produced and could be used for ethanol production.
The Waxman-Markey bill that deals with climate change legislation was held up by many of these lawmakers until a provision was included in the legislation that delays the land-use accounting methods developed by the EPA for five years. House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson was instrumental in delaying the bill until the measure delaying the land-use accounting methods was included. In Peterson’s opinion the peer review shows ‘“incomplete and unreliable models”’ were used by the EPA to link farming practices overseas and US. Biofuel production.
To read the SustainableBusiness.com article click here.
To read the peer review report click here.
Posted: 08/12/09
