Obama gives biofuels mandate the green light

WASHINGTON — President Obama announced steps to increase the use of biofuels in the U.S., although, surprisingly, traditional soy-based diesel would be limited in an EPA proposal.

Obama signed a Presidential Directive establishing a Biofuels Interagency Working Group and announced additional Recovery Act funds for renewable fuel projects. He also announced his administration’s Notice of a Proposed Rulemaking on the Renewable Fuel Standard.

EISA will establish four categories of renewable fuels: cellulosic biofuels; biomass-based diesel; advanced biofuels; and total renewable fuel.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency proposal outlines the EPA’s strategy for increasing the supply of renewable fuels, poised to reach 36 billion gallons by 2022 — of which 16 billion gallons must be cellulosic biofuels; and 1 billion gallons must be of biomass-based diesel.

Refiners must meet the requirements to receive credit toward meeting the new standards.

In recent years studies have emerged that show that biofuel production — especially that which involves transforming tracts of cropland to biofuel harvesting — actually increases emissions worldwide as well as food prices.

The National Biodiesel Board — which represents soy farmers — complains that the "EPA, in determining the greenhouse gas profile for biodiesel, is penalizing the U.S. biodiesel industry for land use decisions made outside the U.S. that have little if anything to do with the domestic biodiesel production."

Says Manning Feraci, the NBB’s vice president of federal affairs: "A final rule that is based on questionable science and is structured in a manner that restricts the role of sustainable vegetable oils in the program will make it nearly impossible to meet the Advanced Biofuels goals established by statute."

Canada is preparing to move forward with a B2 biodiesel mandate by 2012. In B.C., the provincial government wants to mandate a B5 blend average starting January 1, much to chagrin of petroleum companies and truckers who feel the policy unfairly place much of the burden of compliance on them.

— with files from Truckinginfo.com


Have your say


This is a moderated forum. Comments will no longer be published unless they are accompanied by a first and last name and a verifiable email address. (Today's Trucking will not publish or share the email address.) Profane language and content deemed to be libelous, racist, or threatening in nature will not be published under any circumstances.

*