by Timothy B. Hurst

Last year the U.S. produced 11.1 billion gallons of biofuel. Obama’s new plan states that by 2022, 21 billion gallons of renewable fuels will need to come from so-called advanced biofuels.

This decision has been a long time in coming. The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) actually started the whole process. Until now, however, the strategy to get to the goals set forth in the EISA were terribly murky. With yesterday’s announcement, the Obama Administration has set clear goals to achieving the required 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels by 2022. Last year the U.S. produced 11.1 billion gallons of biofuels. The new plan announced today states that by 2022, 21 billion gallons of renewable fuels will need to come from so-called advanced biofuels—biofuels that have at least a 50% reduction in GHG emissions when compared to their gas and diesel counterparts.

In addition to the 21 billion gallons of advanced biofuels, requirements set forth by EISA dictated that any new renewable fuel facility constructed after enactment of EISA had to have at least a 20% reduction in GHG emissions when calculated on a lifecycle, cradle-to-grave basis—this includes any new corn ethanol facilities.

EPA’s new data and analysis show that modern corn ethanol facilities powered by natural gas, biomass, or biogas that use advanced technologies and use corn that is grown using modern methods will meet the 20% reduction criteria on a lifecycle basis. This sounds plausible to me, especially considering the thorough analysis by EPA using the best available models and data. EPA also took into consideration over a thousand pages of public comment and has asked the National Academies of Sciences to review its methodology. Based on what I’ve read, I do think the EPA has done the most thorough analysis of lifecycle emissions to date.

What this means, however, is that the roughly 10 billion gallons of biofuels that are currently made in the U.S. with older technologies do not have to meet the 20% GHG reduction criteria. Biofuels made at those facilities may or may not be any better for the environment than their gasoline and diesel counterparts. Some of them are corn ethanol facilities that are powered by coal electricity—which means, according to EPA data, they produce 34% more GHG pollution than their gasoline counterparts. These facilities will continue to exist until such time as they are replaced by newer facilities or the laws change to force retrofits.

So, in 2022, if the Renewable Fuels Standard can be implemented successfully and 36 billion gallons of biofuels are being produced, roughly 21 billion gallons (58%) of them will be “advanced” with a 50% reduction in GHG, 5 billion gallons (14%) of them will be EISA mandated to have at least a 20% reduction in GHG, and 10 billion gallons (28%) of them will be of the older type with questionable environmental benefit. To me, 28% is still a large amount of our total biofuels to be of questionable environmental benefit.

What impact will the renewable fuel standard have on land use and food supply?

What the Obama/EPA/DOE/USDA analysis doesn’t take into consideration is the amount of land required to produce 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels and what effect that might have on food supply. Sure the 21 billion gallons of advanced biofuels produced in 2022 will typically come from non-food sources (with the exception of sugarcane ethanol and soy oil), but 15 billion gallons of our biofuels will still come from corn in 2022.

Let’s say that by 2022 our farmers are really good at growing corn for ethanol and have been able to squeeze about 500 gallons of ethanol out of every acre of corn. That would equal 30,000,000 acres, or roughly 14 Yellowstone National Parks. That’s a heck of a lot of food land going to production of biofuels. Does this make sense, or should we be emphasizing a phase out of all food-based biofuels after 2022?

Reprinted with permission from Ecopolitology