Advanced BioFuels USA

by Joanne Ivancic* (Advanced Biofuels USA) Recently, the Georgetown Climate Center facilitated the third in a series of Transportation and Climate Initiative Listening Sessions designed to “(cast) a broader net to obtain input on strategies our states (CT, DE, DC, MD, MA, NY, RI, and VT) should consider to reduce carbon emissions from the transportation sector; modernize the transportation system and increase investments to support zero-emission vehicle goals and carbon emissions reduction.”

Wilmington, Delaware Listening Session

This one, in Wilmington, Delaware, follows one in Albany, New York, and another in Hartford, Connecticut.  With these sessions, GCC facilitates “input on potential policy approaches to bring about a cleaner and more resilient transportation future across the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic region.” Essentially, they conduct large-scale focus group discussions.   These sessions are not and do not pretend to be workshops of experts strategizing on how to accomplish specific goals.  Rather, they are organized to ascertain what the participants think are transportation needs in the region, what goals of transportation planning should be, and to provide suggestions for how those goals might be accomplished.

Participants at tables of 10 engaged in small-group discussions about regional transportation.

As soon as I heard about these, I urged GCC to be sure to include a biofuels perspective in their conversations because biofuels could be important in reducing life cycle carbon emissions from transportation and modernizing the transportation system, and, perhaps with ethanol fuel cells and other innovations, even support

Derth  of Biofuels  or Rural Perspectives

I feared, and a copy of the roster confirmed, that very few attendees of the self-selected groups represented biofuels-oriented organizations.  I found that Ryan Lamberg was there representing the National Biodiesel Board as he had at the previous two sessions and there were representatives from the Union of Concerned Scientists which promotes both biofuels and electric vehicles to cut petroleum use and reduce transportation emissions.

I also didn’t see much of a rural perspective represented.

As one person at the Wilmington session said, when she thought of Maryland, she only thought of the I-95 corridor.  She never gave a thought to the agricultural areas of the Eastern Shore, Western Shore or Western Maryland.  From other discussions about transportation challenges, it was clear that the travel distances and resources available to those living in small towns and rural communities were not familiar to many participants and, thus, did not figure in generalizations and assumptions presented in group summaries.

Opportunities for networking.

Focus Groups, Valuable Ideas, Insights

The discussions in Wilmington included about 100 participants (about 15 tables of 10 with one facilitator and one resource person) interested enough in the topic to dedicate an evening to sharing their thoughts and ideas.  Many facilitators and resource people were connected to the GCC, Delaware Department of Transportation or Delaware Department of Natural Resources.

Participants were assigned to tables so that people with a variety of backgrounds and expertise could exchange ideas. I met people from state government, nonprofit organizations like League of Women Voters, Union of Concerned Scientists, and a representative from Cummins, the diesel engine manufacturer, and others.

Some of my ideas for decreasing carbon emissions in regional transportation.

To assure that everyone’s thoughts were captured, and to give participants time to organize their thoughts, each segment of the evening began with time to write answers to the topic question (first identifying needs, then goals, then implementation). The worksheets were collected, thus, even if time limits did not permit discussion of some ideas, participants believed that their ideas would be communicated to the listening session organizers and, hopefully, included in a final report.

At our table, we explored a variety of perspectives – apparently more than some other groups which repeatedly came up with “Electrify Everything” as a solution to just about any issue from emissions to congestion.

For example, one person in our group represented a “Smart Growth” perspective with particular emphasis on issues of land use and sprawl, making convincing points about such things as the likelihood of autonomous vehicles encouraging sprawl and working against a Smart Growth strategy.

Others raised concerns ranging from excessive idling, particularly in the areas of the Port of Wilmington, and anticipated “not in my backyard” responses to ideas for improved and expanded railroads, to challenges for funding electric vehicle charging stations and rebates for EV purchasers.

Our group also made the significant suggestion that the states should coordinate their mass transportation planning better.  The non-interactive nature of regional mass rail transportation systems was a key case in point.   For example, Philadelphia-centered Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) should connect easily to the Baltimore and Washington systems, DC MARC (Maryland Rail Commuter) system and DC METRO.  A model was how MARC, DC METRO and Virginia Railway Express (VRE) complement each other.

“Renewable” Not as Prominent as “Electric” 

I was disappointed that “renewable” was not as prominent a topic as “electric,” lacking discussions of how to make that electricity renewable.  And, “electric” discussions seemed to be focused on individuals’ vehicles rather than electric-powered trains and light rail. It would seem decreasing transportation carbon emissions would require defossilizing electricity and liquid fuels as well as promoting low-polluting mass transportation on routes optimized for key user locations and characteristics.

Suggestions for the Future

The next session is scheduled for New York City on July 24.  Watch for more information on a session to be hosted in Maryland this summer or fall.

My suggestion would be that the states involved in this initiative also hold workshops with experts from both state and regional level organizations and government (Councils of Governments, for example) and with representatives from the private sector including personal and public transportation and freight transport.  Included should be experts in trucking, rail, barges and other water-based shipping and airports. To address the focus on carbon emissions related to climate change mitigation, the supply chain related to non-fossil-based fuel from producers to retail suppliers must be represented.  If air pollution emissions are an issue, then fuel and engine experts who can talk about the entire range of near-term transportation options are essential.   Invitees talking about transportation needs should include representation from the rural and ex-urban parts of the states as well as from the main urban-to-urban corridors.

We can create an exciting, de-fossilized, low pollution transportation future if we put our minds to it in a coordinated fashion.  These focus group listening sessions provided a quick look at what is on the minds of people who are interested in improving transportation in the region.  It should be considered a start, not an end.

*Joanne Ivancic serves as executive director of Advanced Biofuels USA.

Photos: J.Ivancic

Updated 6/28/2018 7:00PM to clarify that GCC facilitates sessions for states who host them and to provide new information about coming Maryland session.