ARB Offices / CalEPA Building

The most recent approach models the totality of biodiesel's emissions characteristics and related factors, concluding that a "safe harbor" level of B10 is acceptable without mitigation for animal fat biodiesel. The modeling shows B10 is acceptable without mitigation for all other feedstocks during the low ozone period and B5 is NOx neutral during the high ozone period. The ARB's Safe Harbor proposal would require mitigation for each gallon above B5 for Low Saturation Biodiesel (e.g. CN<56) and B10 for High Saturation Biodiesel (e.g. CN≥56). Di-tert butyl peroxide (DTBP) was presented as a possible mitigation strategy.

Possible exemptions were discussed on higher blends of biodiesel of B20 or less in NTDEs based on recent studies showing no impacts from biodiesel on NOx in light and medium duty vehicles. Also discussed was a proposal to transition from qualitative descriptions of feedstocks (e.g. animal, soy) to one based on their performance value, cetane number or index.

Because NTDEs are NOx neutral with biodiesel, and the levels of NTDEs are increasing over time and expected to penetrate above 90 percent by 2023, it was presented that this would then eliminate the need for NOx mitigation.

The proposal was to begin reporting requirements on January 1, 2016 and per gallon NOx mitigation for blends above the Safe Harbor level on January 1, 2018.

CBA's comments supported a significance level of B20, a level at which biodiesel has been shown, in studies previously presented to the Air Resources Board, to have a self-mitigating emissions profile due to the 50 percent or greater decreases in all other pollutants needed for ozone formation (PM and hydrocarbons). We requested that, at the minimum, to assure that our industry is able to continue serving its public and private customers, and in hopes of growing and providing more of biodiesel's benefits, ARB adopt the following:

• A phase-in period of at least 3 years to allow for the significant changes associated with compliance.
• B10 all year-round. This is necessary for the growth of our industry and as a means to ensure the availability of low CI fuels in the state.
• A process for specific exemptions based on the health benefits of biodiesel. For example, a school system that wants to use B20 (or public fleets that serve vulnerable communities subject to diesel fuel's disease-causing emissions).
• Exemptions for fleets that use 80% NTDEs and exemptions for light and medium duty fleets.
• An NTDE provision that sunsets at a lower threshold.
• Biodiesel producers should be allowed the option of using either a cetane test or a Celsius cloud point test for purposes of regulatory compliance.
• Recognition that biodiesel and renewable diesel are both needed and should be optimized. (While renewable diesel is a valuable product, it does not have biodiesel's emissions reductions and benefits for PM, VOCs, and hydrocarbons.)

NBB and other CBA member companies, especially biodiesel producers, have gone on record with similar comments. A workshop to discuss regulatory language will be held in November. Related agency documents are posted here:  http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/diesel/altdiesel/biodiesel.htm.  

A pair of Senate Democrats yesterday urged President Obama to reverse proposed cuts to the nation's biofuel blending mandate.

Sens. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) said in a letter to the president that the administration is in danger of undermining its climate change goals if it goes through with the proposed reductions.

EPA last November proposed to scale back the nation's 2014 mandates for conventional ethanol and advanced biofuels an overall 16 percent compared to the levels Congress anticipated when it passed into law the renewable fuel standard in 2007. A final version of the rule currently at the White House for review is expected to increase the targets but still come in under the RFS levels.

"If adopted, this rule would increase, not decrease, carbon pollution," Markey and Boxer wrote in the letter yesterday. "The RFS is a critical piece of our nation's climate mitigation policies."

The senators' message echoes concerns made by the advanced biofuels industry over the last few months about EPA's proposal (Greenwire, Sept. 22). Markey and Boxer cite a recent analysis by the Biotechnology Industry Organization, a biofuels trade group, that found the rule as proposed would increase net carbon pollution by 28.2 million metric tons -- or the greenhouse gas emissions equivalent of nearly 6 million cars -- in 2014 compared to what could be achieved by retaining the renewable fuel standard.

The senators also accused EPA of relying on a "questionable reading" of the renewable fuel standard in its reasoning behind the proposed decrease. EPA based its proposal on the "blend wall," the term used to represent the 10 percent saturation level of ethanol in the fuel market, which it said limited the amount of ethanol that it could mandate be used in gasoline this year. The agency also cited a slower-than-expected ramp-up in the nation's domestic advanced biofuels industry.

Markey and Boxer wrote that EPA's rule would allow oil companies to escape their RFS obligations and warned that it could drive investment in the advanced biofuels sector overseas.

"EPA's proposed rule would not only increase carbon pollution, but would also derail our efforts to attract investment to critical U.S. innovation markets and drive the development of fuels that further reduce carbon pollution in the long-term," they wrote.

Biofuels groups applauded the letter.

"This is a pretty important statement," said Brooke Coleman, executive director of the Advanced Ethanol Council. "Two Democratic leaders on the issues of alternative fuels, innovation and carbon -- from the committee of jurisdiction -- are telling the president that he is in the wrong place on the RFS."

Opponents of the renewable fuel standard today pushed back against the letter.

"If the senators really were sincere about the environmental impact of the RFS as opposed to their rote attack on the oil industry, they would be better served by reading EPA data indicating corn ethanol actually increases GHG emissions compared to gasoline or that EPA and [National Academy of Sciences] studies show that the higher RFS volumes raise ozone levels," Stephen Brown, vice president and counsel for Tesoro Corp., said via email.

Some environmental groups have said that EPA's proposal would lead to less carbon dioxide emissions. Lowering the corn ethanol mandate by 1.4 billion gallons, the level in EPA's November proposal, would reduce emissions by the equivalent of taking 580,000 cars off the road, according to a May report by the Environmental Working Group that has been faulted by a group of scientists (Greenwire, May 29).

New campaign launched

EPA's final rule could be released any day, but some industry observers expect that the agency will not issue it until after the midterm elections. As the White House continues its review of the rule, a pro-RFS coalition of biofuels, agricultural and national security interests today launched a new campaign highlighting campaign contributions from the oil industry.

The ads, which are running digitally in Capitol Hill publications, say that oil industry-affiliated interests have spent $1.1 trillion since 2008 in lobbying Congress and campaign contributions. They urge Obama to not "cave in" to oil lobbying and reduce the renewable fuel standard. Oil industry trade groups have been calling for the full repeal of the renewable fuel standard by Congress.

The ads are paid for by the Fuels America coalition and will run for a week

Bay Area Clean Cities Biodiesel Summit  

Highlights Fleet Success in SF, San Jose, and New York 

On October 7th, the Bay Area Clean Cities Coalitions presented their first Bay Area Biodiesel Summit at the Main SF Library. The Summit brought together biodiesel experts in policy, fuel sourcing, technical issues, and fleet management to talk about biodiesel to an audience of regulators, fuel distributors, and fleet managers.  

Laying a solid foundation of technical definitions and issues was Scott Fenwick, Technical Director, National Biodiesel Board (NBB), who covered biodiesel and renewable diesel. Don Scott, Director of Sustainability, NBB, presented the latest information on biodiesel's many benefits , including environmental, health, and many more. Discussing some key California policy issues, Shelby Neal, Director of State Government Affairs, NBB, touched on the Low Carbon Fuel Standard re-adoption and Alternative Diesel Fuel rulemaking processes currently underway. The state's history with biodiesel in USTs and the permanent UST regulation were discussed by Celia DuBose, Executive Director, CBA.  

Marty Mellera, Manager, Climate Action and Greening, San Francisco Municipal Transit Agency (SMTA), and Dan Sunseri, Fleet Manager, City of San Jose inspired the group with presentations on the success of their programs. Keynote speaker Keith Kerman, Chief Fleet Officer, New York City and Deputy Commissioner, Department of Citywide Administrative Services, pumped up the inspiration level with details of the success of their programs, including local laws mandating biodiesel use in buildings and vehicles. Biodiesel is literally at the top of the list of these great cities' GHG reduction and/or sustainability programs. You can see some of these great stats in the summit presentations (link below). 

The event wrapped up with Dolores Santos, Fuel Supply Expert, Oil Price Information Service, and Eric Bowen, Vice President, Renewable Energy Group, bringing years of combined experience in the fuels industry and biodiesel specifically to their discussion of fuel sourcing and much more.