We are not accepting donations from people or companies in Florida due to unfair reporting requirements and fees not imposed by any other state.

Call to Action for a Truly Sustainable Renewable Future
August 8, 2013 – 5:07 pm | No Comment

-Include high octane/high ethanol Regular Grade fuel in EPA Tier 3 regulations.
-Use a dedicated, self-reducing non-renewable carbon user fee to fund renewable energy R&D.
-Start an Apollo-type program to bring New Ideas to sustainable biofuel and …

Read the full story »
Business News/Analysis

Federal Legislation

Political news and views from Capitol Hill.

More Coming Events

Conferences and Events List in Addition to Coming Events Carousel (above)

Original Writing, Opinions Advanced Biofuels USA

Sustainability

Home » Business News/Analysis, California, Opinions, Policy

Big Changes in California LCFS Are Called for in a New Report

Submitted by on November 20, 2013 – 4:50 pmNo Comment

by John Kingston (Platts)  The University of California-Davis has a new study out about California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard. Once you get past the standard dry academic writing, much of it is fairly startling.

We care about the source of the report because the school’s Institute of Transportation Studies is essentially the intellectual center of the LCFS. And what it calls for in the study, released last month but published on an LCFS-centered Twitter feed just a few days ago would, if implemented, mark a significant change in the way the state’s LCFS is administered.

“We find that compliance costs may increase rapidly in the future if there are large differences in marginal costs between traditional fossil fuels and alternative, low carbon intensity fuels; or if there are capacity or technological constraints to deploying alternative fuels, particularly those with low carbon intensity,” the report said.

“In the absence of readily available, low CI fuel alternatives, the fuel market will adjust along two dimensions to maintain compliance with the LCFS: (i) increase the use of cheaper fuels below the Standard such as ethanol derived from corn starch and sugarcane; or (ii) increase fuel prices and reduce fuel consumption to a level where the (LCFS) is technologically feasible.”

That second development might be a bit of an issue in California, or anywhere, for that matter.

So there are a few suggestions in the report on how to deal with that. One is that the state implement a credit “window,” where the state can create and sell credits at a given price. The report notes this would effectively put a cap on the price of LCFS credits.

A second is to hit individual suppliers–such as refiners–with non-compliance penalties if they post a CI deficit in a given year. Now, they need to buy their way out of that situation, since suppliers aren’t permitted to carry over deficits. But under this proposal, the penalty would be at a set price, and that price would then effectively act as a cap on the price of LCFS credits. Such a policy would also expand enforcement of the LCFS to a company-by-company basis, something the LCFS now lacks.  READ MORE   Download Report

Related Post

Tags: , , , , ,

Comments are closed.