Advanced Biofuels USA: promoting the understanding, development and use of advanced biofuels around the world.

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 » Aviation Fuel, Biofuels Digest Conferences, BioRefineries, Business News/Analysis, California, Federal Regulation, Opinions, Other Conferences, Policy, Presentations, Sustainability

Lo-Carb at Ay Speed: The Digest’s 2017 Multi-Slide Guide to California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard

Submitted by on December 5, 2017 – 11:06 amNo Comment

by Jim Lane (Biofuels Digest)  There are two approaches to encouraging low-carbon fuels  — volumetric mandates and carbon reduction incentives. What is different about a Low Carbon Fuel Standard — as compared to a Renewable Fuel Standard?

There are 4 primary differences.

1. An RFS creates a standard, and any fuel that meets that standard can compete in that market. Once a fuel has met the low-carbon standard, it becomes entirely about fuel price — a $3.00 cellulosic fuel that reduces carbon by 60% will get market share over a $3.10 cellulosic fuel that reduces carbon by 100%, because both fuels meet the cellulosic standard. In an LCFS, all fuels get credited according to the carbon reductions of their pathway. So, there are no “motivational dead zones” when it comes to pushing harder on reducing carbon.

2. An LCFS sets carbon volumes, not fuel volumes. Under an LCFS, it entirely fine if a target of reducing carbon by 5% is achieved by having 10 percent of the fuels have a 50% lower carbon intensity, OR 50 percent of the fuels having a 10% lower carbon intensity.

3. All fuels and energy systems compete against each other. Nat Gas? Electrics? Biofuels? Just register a pathway, prove the carbon intensity, and you can compete as a carbon-lowering fuel. under an LCFS, it doesn’t matter if carbon is reduced via electrics, or biodiesel.

4. So far, the California LCFS only covers road transportation. So, jet fuel qualifies under the US RFS, but not under the California LCFS. This creates problems for airlines, because jet producers can generally also produce diesel fuel, and diesel qualifies under both the RFS and the LCFS  — so, there’s far less value in jet fuel and, consequently, no one wants to make it despite airlines clamoring for a low—carbon solution and everyone agreeing that there’s no low-carbon solution on the horizon for aviation except low carbon liquid fuels.

Graham Noyes gave this illuminating update on the promise and progress of the LCFS at ABLC Next 2017 in San Francisco.  READ MORE

Related Post

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

This is a Gravatar-enabled weblog. To get your own globally-recognized-avatar, please register at Gravatar.

This blog is kept spam free by WP-SpamFree.