Transport Energy Taskforce Working Group 2 18 December, London 2014 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transport Energy Taskforce

Working Group 2 18 December, London 2014

Aaron Berry Head of Biofuels Strategy Department for Transport Aaron.berry@dft.gsi.gov.uk www.gov.uk/dft

Agenda

• Introductions
• Actions from previous meeting
• Advanced fuels
• Sustainability definitions
• 2020/2030 scenarios
• Next steps
• Date of next mtg: 4 February

Action Points from last meeting (1)

• DfT to circulate revised terms of reference.
• DfT to contact those identified to encourage participation in future

meetings.

• Attendees to submit a definition of sustainability and of advanced

biofuels, each to be no more than half a page in length. These should be submitted by Friday 5 December.

Action Points from last meeting (2)

Request WG1 to:

• Develop scenarios for 2030.
• Check with OLEV the latest projections for 2030 uptake of EVs

and ensure 2030 modelling reflects this, including stretch scenarios.

• Include modelling with E10 at all sub-target levels
• Consider whether a ‘lowest cost to the consumer’ model would

be possible.

• Publish spreadsheets behind scenarios.

Contributions 10 responses

Definition of Advanced Biofuels

Common criteria

• Made from non-crop feedstock (FoE) (IEEP)(REA)(BP)(ICCT)
• Uses advanced processing (FoE) (IEEP)(REA)(Shell)(BP)(ICTT)
• Deliver substantive & genuine GHG savings (including ILUC) (IEEP)

(Shell (60%+), REA – don’t mention iluc here) (BP) (ICCT)

• ‘Drop-in’ quality for diesel applications (Neste)(ICCT)

Advanced – other comments

The term advanced biofuel does not automatically suggest that a particular biofuel is sustainable (FoE)

Annex IX part a list: feedstocks

Member States shall seek to achieve the objective of a minimum proportion of biofuels produced from feedstocks and other fuels, listed in part A of Annex IX, being consumed on their territory.

Feedstocks and fuels, the contribution of which towards the target(s) referred to in Article 3(4) shall be considered to be twice their energy content (a) Algae if cultivated on land in ponds or photobioreactors. (b) Biomass fraction of mixed municipal waste, but not separated household waste subject to recycling targets under point (a) of Article 11(2) of Directive 2008/98/EC. (c) Bio-waste as defined in Article 3(4) of Directive 2008/98/EC from private households subject to separate collection as defined in Article 3(11) of that Directive. (d) Biomass fraction of industrial waste not fit for use in the food or feed chain, including material from retail and wholesale and the agro-food and fish and aquaculture industry, and excluding feedstocks listed in part B of this Annex. (e) Straw. (f) Animal manure and sewage sludge. (g) Palm oil mill effluent and empty palm fruit bunches. (h) Tall oil pitch. (i) Crude glycerine.

Annex IX cont.

(j) Bagasse. (k) Grape marcs and wine lees. (l) Nut shells. (m) Husks. (n) Cobs cleaned of kernels of corn. (o) Biomass fraction of wastes and residues from forestry and forest-based industries, i.e. bark, branches, pre-commercial thinnings, leaves, needles, tree tops, saw dust, cutter shavings, black liquor, brown liquor, fibre sludge, lignin and tall oil. (p) Other non-food cellulosic material as defined in point (s) of the second paragraph of Article 2. (q) Other ligno-cellulosic material as defined in point (r) of the second paragraph of Article 2 except saw logs and veneer logs. (r) Renewable liquid and gaseous fuels of non-biological origin.

Annex IX implications

Many feedstocks potentially covered by annex IX do not need ‘advanced’ processing Current supply makes up a significant portion of the 0.5% sub target = ~300m/l

RTFO Y6 double counting materials (excluding UCO/tallow)

Material Fuel RTFO y6 volume m/l Food waste Biodiesel 1 POME 12 Spent bleached earth 7 Waste pressings 1.5 Starch slurry Bioethanol 20 Crude glycerine MTBE 9 Crude glycerine Methanol 22 Sugar beet chips Methanol 12 MSW Biogas 2 Total 86.5

DfT Demonstration competition

“Biofuels delivering high greenhouse gas emissions savings produced from sustainable, non-food feedstocks via not yet commercial conversion technologies.”

Discussion Points

• Should a regulatory based sub-target for

‘advanced fuels’ use criteria other than feedstock? (annex IX approach)

• Is there agreement around the criteria:
• non-crop
• advanced process
• substantial GHG including ILUC
• drop-in quality for diesel applications

Definition of Sustainability

Common criteria

• Low impacts on soil, air & water quality, biodiversity

(FoE)(IEEP)(Greenpeace)(BP)(industry – RED criteria, not ILUC)

• Avoids adverse social/economic impacts (e.g. land grabbing, food

security) (FoE)(IEEP)(Greenpeace)

• Genuine GHG savings (nb varying views on inclusion of ILUC) (FoE)

(Greenpeace) )(IEEP)

• No competition with existing uses, (IEEP for waste) including food

(FoE)

• Must be independently verified (FoE)(UK ethanol industry)(REA)
• RED criteria (Neste, plus cap), UK bioethanol industry, BP

Sustainability – other comments

“FoE, in coalition with other UK NGOs, opposes an increase in the use of crop-based biofuels, e.g. through the introduction of E10” “For UK transport policy this means that the use of crop-based biofuels should be capped at the current level and phased out over time.” (FoE) “Our industry has to compete internationally and the UK should not introduce sustainability requirements that are not composed on our competitors” to ensure fair competition between raw material user sectors, it is crucial to have similar sustainability criteria independent of the final product in question.” Neste/BP/ made a similar point “There is good reason to believe that the [sustainability] measures in the directives have had limited efficacy. On carbon performance, .. iLUC … ….rules on biodiverse areas are similarly at risk of indirect leakage.’ (ICCT) “ILUC should not be included in a definition of sustainability until there is a globally agreed scientific consensus on ILUC effects with agreed verification requirements.”

2030 Energy Demand Scenarios

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030

‐00 10 20 30 40 50 60 tonnes of oil equivalent

Petrol ‐ road Diesel ‐ road Bioethanol ‐ road Biodiesel ‐ road Electricity ‐ road Diesel ‐ rail Electricity ‐ rail Kerosene ‐ aviation

High abatement scenario (carbon plan 2011)

Electric vehicle stock projections to 2030

2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Millions of vehicles low medium high

20% 40% 50%

% new vehicle sales in 2030

2020 scenarios 10% RED target with 0.5% advanced biofuel sub-target

Possible 2030 scenarios

What conclusions can be drawn from the modelling?

• In all modelling scenarios considered there was a

considerable volume of diesel, petrol and jet fuel in 2030

• Key known uncertainties include availability of waste

fats and oils (first gen biodiesel); and costs and availability of advanced fuels

• Forecast decreasing petrol demand leads to

decreasing E5/10 bioethanol blending opportunities

• The primary constraint to achieving 8% without crops

appears to be advanced production capacity, esp for diesel, rather than feedstock availability.

Questions and Next Steps (WG1)

• Are there other modelling exercises we should

consider?

• Are all of the scenarios feasible in terms of

production?

• What should we assume for advanced costs?

What other sources of data are available?

• What should we assume for conventional biofuel

costs? What other sources of data are available?

• How can the modelling be improved? Are there
• ther scenarios we should consider?

What is required to reach 2020 targets for ethanol?

Current current crop % = 1.33% of total fuel sales crop bioethanol = 830m/l UK bioethanol production capacity = 890m/l 2020 Projection E10 = 1145m/l litres ethanol (855m/l crop) (290m/l advanced)

Discussion Points

• Is a cap on the contribution of crops preferable to

no cap?

• Is there a level of cap around which the is any

agreement – for 2020? And 2030?

• Is crop ethanol preferable to crop biodiesel?