Advanced BioFuels USA

by Jeff Barber (OPIS) After four years of the Trump administration’s often-chaotic approach to the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), many in the biofuels industry were hoping President Joe Biden would bring a level of stability and support to the program.

While the new administration has provided renewable fuel producers with some wins – most notably a strong endorsement this spring of last year’s federal appeals court ruling limiting EPA’s authority to exempt small refineries from complying with the RFS – the industry appears to be growing more anxious now that the White House’s push to electrify much of the transportation sector will leave it with an increasingly smaller role to play.

While campaigning for office last August, Biden won applause from the renewable fuels industry when he accused the Trump White House of undermining the RFS through its liberal grants of small refinery exemptions to “Big Oil.”

…

He promised that a Biden administration would “honor the critical role the renewable fuel industry plays in supporting the rural economy and the leadership role American agriculture will play in our fight against climate change.”

But by the time the statement was released, some in the biofuels industry were already beginning to wonder about their long-term future if Biden won.

In mid-July of last year, just weeks before he voiced support for the RFS, Biden unveiled a $2 trillion plan to get the U.S. to net-zero carbon emissions by 2050. To reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from transportation, the plan called for adding 500,000 electric vehicle (EV) charging stations by 2030 and revising fuel economy standards to speed the adoption of zero-emission vehicles.

As for biofuels? The proposal only promised to “make it easier for mobility to be powered by electricity and clean fuels.”

…

But since winning the White House in November, Biden has yet to call for higher production and consumption of renewable fuels as a tool for reducing carbon emissions.

Indeed, the administration has often been somewhat non-comital when pressed on the subject.

…

What appeared to be a bit of good news for the industry came in May when the administration released a fiscal year 2022 budget proposal that included $1 billion in “support for biofuels” between 2022 and 2024. Missing from the plan, however, were details on exactly what the money would be used for.

But in early August of this year, the White House delivered twin blows to the biofuels industry when it unveiled a plan calling for half of all new cars and light-duty trucks sold in the U.S. by 2030 to be powered by electricity and released a proposed rewrite of the Trump administration’s fuel economy standards that failed to include a role for high octane, higher ethanol blends.

Many believe the 2030 target will be difficult to achieve given that U.S. electric vehicle (EV) sales over the past three years have been about 2% of total new car sales. However, the announcement was yet another sign the current administration may be discounting the contributions the renewable fuels industry says it can make in cutting GHGs.

…

And in June, a broad coalition of renewable fuel producers and auto industry groups called on Congress to adopt a technology-neutral national clean fuels policy that it said is essential if the U.S. is to achieve the administration’s goal of reaching net-zero GHG emissions by mid-century.

That was followed a month later by a letter to the White House from RFA members committed to ensuring that ethanol can reduce carbon emissions by an average of at least 70% when compared with gasoline and promising the biofuel could reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2030 through CCS, increased use of renewable power and biogas at plants, and the increased adoption of more carbon-efficient agricultural practices.

The question still to be answered, however, is whether a White House that may have decided EVs are the future is paying much attention.  READ MORE

Federal fleet electrification faces delays (E&E News/Climatewire)

Schmitt: Biden wants agriculture on the front line of climate change, leaving farmers behind (Iowa State Daily)

Excerpt from Iowa State Daily:  “We see farmers making American agriculture first in the world to achieve net-zero emissions and gaining new sources of income in the process,” said President Biden during remarks on climate change in late January. 

…

 Economically, ethanol also offers a cheaper fuel option for consumers. With ethanol as a vital resource, Biden’s statement about agriculture leading the charge to mitigate climate change seems realistic. 

However, we received a conflicting message after President Biden signed an empty proclamation that promises 50 percent of all cars sold in the U.S. would be net-zero emitters by 2030. Nonetheless, the president’s conflicting actions did not stop there. 

As the United States emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic, consumers have been dealing with significantly higher gas prices due to increased cars on the road. 

The uptick in prices prompted the Biden administration to call on OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) leaders early last month to increase oil production to alleviate domestic transportation costs. That call came after the international cartel already agreed to produce an additional 400,000 barrels of oil per day after negotiations with top members. 

OPEC declined his offer to the president’s disappointment but no surprise because the U.S. holds no leverage over the international oil industry. He made that clear when he blocked the advancement of the Keystone Pipeline.  

“The future of the auto industry is electric,” said Biden in a tweet Aug. 5. “There’s no turning back.”

So, what is it? Does the Biden administration want to put America’s backbone on the front lines or leave them behind in the dust?  READ MORE