'Sustainability Standards & GHG Calculations in the Context of EU Biofuel Legislation’ Deepak Rughani, Biofuelwatch, 4 th November 2008 - A Maze of Half-Truths.

'Sustainability Standards &

GHG Calculations in the Context of

EU Biofuel Legislation’

Deepak Rughani, Biofuelwatch, 4th November 2008

- A Maze of Half-Truths -

“By driving, you will be saving the planet. And the more you drive, the

more you prevent catastrophic climate change.” Biopact ( 29th October 2007,

EU Legislation Timeline - 1* Biofuel Directive agreed by the EU I 2003: 5.75% indicative biofuel target by 2010 (not likely to be met)

* Industry-dominated stakeholder forum set up by the European Commission in 2005 to put forward proposals for expanding agrofuels

* 10% biofuel target for transport put forward by European Commission January 2005

EU Legislation Timeline - 2

+ January 2007: EU Commission publishes draft new Fuel Quality Directive with a 10% 'greenhouse gas reduction target' for transport fuel by 2010, with stated aim of increasing biofuel use

+March 2007: EU Summit agrees to 10% 'renewable road transport fuel' target provided it is 'produced sustainably' and that second generation biofuels will be used

Sustainable biofuels? …A PR disaster

Amazon Deforestation

Orangutan abuse and extermination

Tortilla price protests in Mexico

More bad news from climate experts...

“Rapeseed biofuel 'produces more greenhouse gas than oil or petrol' “, The Times, 22.9.07

“Biofuel farms make CO2 emissions worse”, The Guardian, 8.2.08

Peer reviewed studies prove that all agrofuels worsen climate change.

Growing opposition

'Sustainability standards”Reassuring the public....

EU Parliamentary Committee agrees a comprehensive list of 'standards', including:

* no destruction of primary forest and other wooded land* no destruction of peatland and other high carbon stock* protection of freshwater and soil* social criteria, including land rights, human rights, workers rights* no competition with food production

Whilst not standing in the way of industry expansion...

Truly meeting the standards would be tough – even though indirect impacts on communities, food and environment are ignored. It might even mean abandoning the target....

The FSC hasn't managed in 15 years to guarantee that its certificates mean FSC standards have been met – how can the EU guarantee standards are met for all biomass by 2010???

BUT there are ways of getting round these problems...

Mass balance system:

No need to prove where exactly the feedstock comes from

Meta-standards:

Rely on voluntary agreements to rubber-stamp 'sustainable production' – equal treatment of different standards

Bilateral and multilateral agreements:

The EU could sign an agreement with, say, Brazil, that says all Brazilian biofuels will be classed as meeting all standards for up to five years, unless the EU revokes this sooner.

...that's about all the detail EU has come up with so far!

Roundtables to the rescue

Ilmari Lastikka of Neste Oil in Daily Express, Sabah: “Having the RSPO (Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil) certificate is one way to comply with that [Renewable Energy Directive]' he told reporters...By having the RSPO certificate, palm oil exporters could penetrate into the European market as the certification confirms that a company had adhered to sustainable practices”

How to translate this into greenhouse gas reductions?

Sugar CaneCorn Ethanol

Oil Palm

How to calculate greenhouse gas savings from agrofuels

Step 1:

Ignore all carbon emissions from land-use change: This is essential, because otherwise, there will be no ghg savings. Pretend land-use change is dealt with by sustainability standards, even though those positively encourage certain land-use changes to biofuels (eg conversion of set-asides, shown to result in a 'carbon debt' of 49 years).

Step 2:

Pretend that you have taken account of the evidence on indirect land-use change emissions – by adding a tiny amount of 'presumed greenhouse gas emissions' to the greenhouse gas balance of biofuels – a 'risk adder', but only from 2012 at the earliest. The amount will be decided later by politicians -if they were science-based, there would be no ghg savings.

Step 3:

Maximise positive indirect emission savings. Waste-productsfrom biofuel refining can be fed to cattle. Hence, the more Biofuels we produce, the less soya we need to grow to feed our cattle and the less land-use change and agriculturalemissions there will be overall (having regard to steps 1 and 2) This translates into major ghg savings.

Step 4:

To make make things easier for biofuel producers,Introduce 'default values' for biofuels – for example,have one value for all palm oil biodiesel from refinerieswith methane capture – no matter where or how the oilpalms were grown.

These four steps will ensure that almost all biofuelswill meet the requirement to reduce emissions by at least 35 or 45% by 2015 and by at least 50 or 60% by 2020.

To quote the Best Energies website; “We are well positioned to win the

current land grab in next-generation fuels”

Hundreds of civil society organisations condemn targets and greenwash

* Over 200 organisations support call for an immediate EU agrofuel moratorium

* Call by African civil society groups for a moratorium, including on EU targets

* 5 year agrofuel moratorium call by Via Campesina

* Large number of declarations, eg from Brazil, Paraguay, Argetina, Latin American Networks condemn industrial agrofuels and EU policy

“Humanity must urgently embark on a massive programme to power

civilisation from wood to stave off catastrophic climate change, one of

the world's top scientists has told The Independent on Sunday.” Geoffrey Lean quoting from James Hansen,