Advanced BioFuels USA

(Clean Fuels Alliance America) Eighteen Clean Fuels speakers testify at public hearing on the proposed RFS volume  —  Today, Clean Fuels Alliance America and its members testified at the Environmental Protection Agency’s “Public Hearing for RFS Standards for 2023–2025 and Other Changes,” held via teleconference. Clean Fuels staff expressed frustration with the proposed volumes for biomass-based diesel since they do not match the volumes that are already in the market and do not account for expected growth in capacity and feedstocks.

EPA draws fire for plan to bring EVs into renewable fuel program — Several groups called for the agency to delay the proposal given the complexity of the changes. (Politico Pro)

New RFS Battle Lines Emerge In Fights Over Proposed ‘Set’ Rule’s ‘eRINs’ (Inside EPA)

EPA told to hold off on EV proposal — At a public hearing, the agency faced criticism on its efforts to tie electric vehicles to the renewable fuel standard. (Politico Pro/E&E News Greenwire)

The New RVOs, Not as Clear Cut as it Might Appear (Biofuels Digest/Missouri Corn Growers Association)

Biodiesel Sector Unhappy Over Lack Of Growth In RFS ‘Set’ Volumes (Inside EPA) 

Listen: RFS blending mandate ‘makes no sense, disconnected from reality’: biodiesel group (S&P Global)

12 American Soybean Association representatives testify at EPA public hearing on RFS (Biobased Diesel Daily/American Soybean Association)

Petroleum association warns EPA on electrifying RFS, asks agency to boost advanced biofuel volumes (American Fuel and Petrochemical Association/Biobased Diesel Daily)

Iowa biofuel groups to EPA: Don’t electrify RFS or jeopardize significant soybean-crush investments (Biobased Diesel Daily)

Excerpt from Ethanol Producer Magazine: The Iowa Biodiesel Board also urged the EPA to reconsider its proposed targets for biomass-based diesel. “The proposed volumes for biomass-based diesel and overall advanced biofuel volumes through 2025 are not consistent with the industry’s projected growth, or with the Administration’s own goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,” said Grant Kimberley, executive director of the IBB. “Sending the right market signals through increased volumes, in contrast to what EPA currently proposes, would boost our state’s rural economy and Iowa soybean farmers, who rely on strong commodity demand to support their livelihoods and feed the world.”  READ MORE

Excerpt from Politico Pro/E&E News Greenwire:   EPA’s proposal to wrap electric vehicles into the nation’s renewable fuel standard ran into headwinds from fuel industry groups at a public hearing Tuesday.

Representatives for both the petroleum and biofuel industries called the proposal — which would encourage the use of biofuel to generate electricity for use in electric vehicles — overly complex, and some pressed the agency to handle the issue separately from the annual biofuel regulations it’s currently contemplating.

At issue is EPA’s proposal to allow EV manufacturers to generate renewable fuel credits for the electricity that’s generated from biogas — such as from manure digesters on farms — and used to power their vehicles. The system would for the first time make EVs part of a renewable fuel program that was created mainly to support liquid fuels derived from crops (Greenwire, Dec. 1, 2022).

Renewable fuel credits, called renewable identification numbers, are like a form of currency that keeps the RFS program running. In the ethanol industry, refineries buy RINs, for instance, as an alternative to blending ethanol into transportation fuel. But the eRIN system would work differently, which has raised objections from traditional RFS participants who say it’s too favorable to nonliquid-fueled vehicles. READ MORE

Excerpt from Biofuels Digest/Missouri Corn Growers Association: The perplexing Regulatory Impact Analysis

And worse yet is the perplexing Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) that accompanied the rule. This analysis claims the RFS, specifically the road transport category, increases every pollutant from NOx to evaporative emissions—even carbon monoxide!

Could that be used in future years to backtrack on RFS volumes and further erode demand?  Quite possibly, certainly ethanol opponents could point to that and challenge any use of ethanol, never mind an increase. How could this be?  The answer is the MOVES model EPA uses that penalizes ethanol and must be corrected.

So we have our work cut out for us, even if the current proposed RVOs are finalized. The Next Generation Fuels Act, the control of toxics in gasoline, the correction of the MOVES Model, and demanding EPA correct this flawed impact analysis are on the to-do list.  READ MORE

Excerpt from Biobased Diesel Daily/American Soybean Association:  In a media statement on the decision, ASA said the draft set rule is “deeply disappointing for the biofuels industry and threatens the integrity of the RFS by significantly dialing back annual increases in volume obligations.”

On Jan. 10, ASA directors Dave Walton (Iowa), Chris Hill (Minnesota), Rob Shaffer (Illinois), Monte Peterson (North Dakota), Josh Gackle (North Dakota), Alan Meadows (Tennessee), Daryl Cates (Illinois), Steph Essick (Iowa), Dennis Fujan (Nebraska), Charles Atkinson (Kansas), and Jordan Scott (South Dakota), along with the group’s chief economist, Scott Gerlt, testified on the set rule during EPA’s virtual public hearing.

Soy growers said the new proposed rule will negatively impact producers by derailing the progress and growth made in biofuels investment. They said it also does not align with the administration’s previous commitment to mitigating climate change and lowering greenhouse-gas emissions.

As companies across the soybean-growing region have announced expanded crush capacity expected over the next three years that would increase soybean-oil supplies by about 5.5 billion pounds, Shaffer shared his concerns that EPA’s proposed rule will severely undercut those investments.

“EPA sent a signal to the market in its last rule that affirmed the government’s commitment to biomass-based diesel,” Shaffer said. “The market responded appropriately, announcing tremendous investments in the industry to spur growth and increase domestic soybean-oil supplies. The draft rule for 2023 and beyond would bring those investments to a grinding halt and prevent growth in the industry and our rural economy.”

Cates, president of ASA, shared similar concerns in his testimony.

“EPA made assumptions based on data that doesn’t take into account all the investments that have been announced across the biofuel value chain,” he said. “The fact that biomass-based diesel production has already surpassed the RVOs set forth in this rule tells you all you need to know—the proposal is deeply flawed and needs to be reconsidered to reflect the current state of the market.”

Essick urged EPA not to let weak RVOs stifle the progress being made in the low-carbon fuel sector.

“The rule shuts the door on growth in the biomass-based diesel sector and puts new soybean-crush plants like Platinum Crush in northwest Iowa that are being built with state support in jeopardy,” she said. “In northwest Iowa, the closest plant can be more than an hour away for some farmers, and it often has wait times of more than three hours. This new plant will save farmers time and money, and it will lower their emission outputs because of the shorter travel and wait times.”

ASA said it appreciated the opportunity for public comment and will continue to strongly urge EPA to reevaluate its proposed RVOs for 2023 and beyond before publishing a final rule.

Through a consent decree submitted by EPA and Growth Energy, EPA is required to release the final set rule by June 14. READ MORE