The advanced biofuels industry has criticised the complexity of the EU’s climate legislation package, arguing that the slew of new rules will hinder investor confidence.
The EU executive unveiled its climate package on Wednesday (14 July), which aims to reduce emissions by 55% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels. It comprises over a dozen pieces of legislation to set Europe on the path to carbon neutrality by 2050.
But industry critics say the myriad measures, spread across an assortment of regulations and directives, are complicating the EU’s business environment.
“By going too far in revising all possible acts, the Commission is not providing the industry what is needed for making investment decisions now,” said Marko Janhunen of UPM Biofuels, a Finnish company providing wood-based alternative to petrochemicals. “And we need those investment decisions soon if we want to create green growth,” he told EURACTIV.
…
The leaked draft also includes an increase in the renewables target for transport, from 14% to 26%, and an increase in the sub-target for advanced biofuels, from 3.5% to 5.5%.
Environmental groups have expressed doubts that the target can be met, because advanced biofuels are made from agricultural waste or residues from the forest industry, which are limited in supply.
But the industry dismisses those doubts, saying an enlarged list of approved feedstocks will enable producers to meet the EU’s higher goals using a wider range of renewable energy sources.
“We are confident the higher [advanced biofuels] targets will be met but it is also critically important to see how the Commission enlarges the feedstock list for advanced biofuels which is done separately through a delegated act,” said Marko Janhunen of UPM Biofuels, a Finnish company which produces wood-based alternatives to fossil-based transport fuels.
The list of EU-approved sustainable fuel sources should be expanded to meet the higher targets for second-generation biofuels under the updated renewable energy directive, according to the advanced biofuels industry.
An early draft of the EU’s upcoming renewable energy directive, seen by EURACTIV, confirms the bloc’s objective of roughly doubling the share of solar, wind and other renewables by the end of the decade, to reach 38-40% of Europe’s total energy mix.
The leaked draft also includes an increase in the renewables target for transport, from 14% to 26%, and an increase in the sub-target for advanced biofuels, from 3.5% to 5.5%.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday sided with three small oil refineries seeking exemptions from requirements to blend ethanol into their gasoline. The decision overturns an appellate court ruling from last year.
The ruling sets a precedent, giving the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency more leeway in granting exemptions to oil refineries to rules intended to promote the use of corn-based ethanol and other fuel made from renewable sources.
Last year, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the refineries can only qualify for an exemption if they’ve been continuously exempt already. But in a 6-3 decision, the high court ruled refineries can seek extensions even if they wait until an earlier waiver has lapsed. The justices compared it to a student asking their professor for an extension for a big paper after it’s due.
In a ruling announced June 25, the U.S. Supreme Court delivered an opinion
in HollyFrontier Cheyenne Refining, LLC v.
Renewable Fuels Association, which overturned by a vote of 6 to 3 the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision that in order to qualify for a hardship exemption under the Renewable Fuel Standard, a small refinery must have received uninterrupted, continuous hardship exemptions for every year since 2011.
Although it does allow for refiners to apply to extend RFS exemptions that have lapsed, it does not change the 10th Circuit decision components of the 10th Circuit’s ruling that refiners must still prove economic harm directly related to compliance with the RFS and that EPA cannot use RIN costs as a cause of economic harm while simultaneously admitting RIN costs are recovered in the refiner’s crack spread.`