E n e r g y C e n t e r Barbara Bramble – Chair of the RSB Steering Board And Senior Advisor, Climate and Energy Program, NWF Forestry, Agriculture, and.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
EuropeanCommission Carbon, Food Security and Sustainable Development Carbon, Food Security and Sustainable Development MRV systems for carbon in soils.
Advertisements

Can biofuels be sustainable by 2020? Sjaak Conijn.
Bioenergy Biodiversity and Land use Expert meeting on biodiversity standards and strategies for sustainable cultivation of biomass for non-food purposes.
Land use for bioenergy production – assessing the production potentials and the assumptions of EU bioenergy policy Trends and Future of Sustainable Development.
Water for bioenergy or food, World Water Forum, 19th March 2009 Water for Bioenergy or Food? Topic Introduction Nadine McCormick International Union.
Food Insecurity and Land Grabbing as a result of REDD+ and Bioenergy Simone Lovera, Global Forest Coalition and Sobrevivencia/Friends of the Earth-Paraguay.
THE RENEWABLE ENERGY DIRECTIVE Brussels, 15 February 2008 Mauro POINELLI DG AGRI, European Commission.
Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels E n e r g y C e n t e r The Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels Ensuring that biofuels deliver on their promise of sustainability.
Environmental Issues with Feedstocks for Biofuels and Biochemicals Don O’Connor (S&T) 2 Consultants Inc. SCA Sarnia, June 12, 2012.
Applying Greenhouse Gas Emissions Lifecycle Assessment Jennifer L. Christensen WISE Intern 2009 August 5, 2009.
RSPO Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil Promoting The Growth And Use Of Sustainable Palm Oil RSPO
The role of bioenergy in the European Union Giulio Volpi Renewable Energy and Carbon Capture and Storage Policy DG Energy, European Commission.
- Biofuels: Issues at stake PFSA, Namur, 21/12/06.
Economic and Land Use Implications of Biofuels: Role of Policy Madhu Khanna With Xiaoguang Chen and Haixiao Huang Department of Agricultural and Consumer.
Food Security 14 November 2011 Chair: Professor Tim Jones Panel: Professor Elizabeth Dowler Dr Rosemary Collier Dr Ben Richardson Professor Laura Green.
Katoomba Group Training Initiative Climate Change, Markets and Services Welcome and Introduction Course Introduction and Guidelines Participant Introduction:
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development: opportunities in the Energy Sector Victoria Jane Primhak.
WELFARE TRADEOFFS OF BIOFUELS INVESTMENTS: A RAPID DECISION SUPPORT TOOL. Preliminary results from a case study in Tanzania. Giacomo Branca 1, Luca Cacchiarelli.
Current Research and Emerging Economic and Environmental Issues on Biofuels Madhu Khanna University of Illinois.
Socio- economic implications of climate change for tea producing countries.
Evaluation of Economic, Land Use, and Land Use Emission Impacts of Substituting Non-GMO Crops for GMO in the US Farzad Taheripour Harry Mahaffey Wallace.
Renewable energy – EU policy update Mihail DUMITRU European Commission, Directorate-General for Agriculture.
Green Economy Initiative Derek Eaton UNEP UNCEEA, June 2010.
Making certification work for sustainable development: The case of biofuels Simonetta Zarrilli UNCTAD Geneva, September 2009.
The NFU champions British farming and provides professional representation and services to its farmer and grower members Sustainable Intensification The.
An assessment of the global land use change and food security effects of the use of agricultural residues for bioenergy production Edward Smeets, Andrzej.
FAO NAMA learning tool to support NAMA preparation in agriculture
Climate Policy Development Tom Peterson The Center For Climate Strategies August 25, 2005.
Sustainability Overview Laura McCann, on behalf of Alison Goss Eng U.S. Department of Energy Office of Biomass Program February 23, 2010.
O.de Research sponsored by Development of Strategies and Sustainability Standards for the Certification of Biomass for International Trade (Bio-global)
Latest EU policy developments in the field of bioenergy
US Forest Service GHG and Energy Modeling Climate and Energy Policy: The Role of Forests Rob Doudrick US Forest Service Research and Development.
Barbara Bramble National Wildlife Federation And Chair, Board of Directors RSB ABLC – 2014 – Washington DC Moving from Conflict and Controversy to Results:
Investment in Sustainable Natural Resource Management (focus: Agriculture) increases in agricultural productivity have come in part at the expense of deterioration.
Directorate General for Energy and Transport Euroforenet Conference 20/11/2007 Brussels European Commission Kyriakos MANIATIS Biofuels & Industry DG TREN.
1 Bioenergy LCA analysis: Beyond biofuels Expert meeting 10 June 2008 André Jol Head of group climate change and energy European Environment Agency.
Life Cycle Assessment of Biofuels Paolo Masoni ENEA – LCA & Ecodesign Lab (ACS PROT – INN) Rome, th January.
1 Future CAP for Scotland: Challenges for post 2013 Climate Change Graham Kerr Group Manager, SAC Consulting.
Biofuels – EU policy context Funding and Legislation Workshops Glasgow, 26 May 2011 Francesca Giannini Scotland Europa.
Office of the Chief Economist Office of Energy Policy and New Uses National Agricultural Credit Committee Harry S. Baumes Associate Director Office of.
Office of the Chief Economist Office of Energy Policy and New Uses Harry S. Baumes, Ph. D. Associate Director Office of Energy Policy and New Uses The.
Exploring Solutions Activity 2: Clearing the Air.
Supply chains for the UK to 2050 A. Bauen (*), R. Slade, S. Jablonski and C. Panoutsou The context The aim of this work is to explore the potential for.
Can Biofuels be Sustainable in an Unsustainable Agriculture? Daniel G. De La Torre Ugarte Chad M. Hellwinckel Chad M. Hellwinckel American Chemical Society.
Sustainability considerations: Industry and developing countries Dr Rocio A Diaz Chavez Centre for Environmental Policy Imperial College London
GEF and the Conventions The Global Environment Facility: Is the financial mechanism for the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants the.
1. Sustainable Development. International commitment. COORDINATION. A LONG-TERM VISSION. Policies Enhance the economic growth. Certainty and Economic.
International Consultation on Pro-Poor Jatropha Development
Bioenergy: Where We Are and Where We Should Be Daniel G. De La Torre Ugarte Chad M. Hellwinckel.
California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard Overview of the Proposed Regulation March 16, 2009 California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board.
0 National Inter-Ministerial Dialogue on Climate Change Cape Hotel Monrovia, Liberia June 25, 2009 Assessing and Developing Policy Options for Addressing.
Northeast and Mid-Atlantic Regional Low Carbon Fuel Standard Nancy L. Seidman Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Climate Strategies Massachusetts Department.
Indirect land-use change emissions - what do we know? Hans van Steen - Head of Unit, European Commission, DG Energy C1.
Network for Certification and Conservation of Forests.
Bio-energy Insurance Policy: Ensuring the Sustainability of Feedstocks Barbara J. Bramble Senior Program Advisor for International Affairs.
November Georgia Farm 2 Fly – Aviation and RSB Barbara Bramble – Chair of the RSB Board of Directors and Senior Advisor, International Wildlife.
Kristīne Kozlova DG TREN, European Commission 2 April 2009 The Renewable energy directive: final agreement and next steps EUROPEAN COMMISSION.
Our Vision: A new, positive relationship between people and the environment.
Sampsa Kiianmaa WWF Finland Sustainability of Biofuels - Challenges The recent debate has create an unfortunate black and white picture in regards.
Integrated policy frameworks
Policies to Accelerate the Bioeconomy: Unintended Effects and Effectiveness Madhu Khanna University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Makala: the necessary evil
Bioenergy Supply, Land Use, and Environmental Implications
Rural Proofing Martin Scheele
Content Need for Sustainability Criteria Development of Methodology
Content Need for Sustainability Criteria Development of Methodology
Rural Proofing Martin Scheele
Agriculture’s contribution to a carbon neutral Europe
Technical Press Briefing LIFE Sub-programme for Climate Action Commission proposal for a new LIFE Regulation ( ) 12 December 2011.
Industrial Value Chain: A Bridge Towards a Carbon Neutral Europe
Presentation transcript:

E n e r g y C e n t e r Barbara Bramble – Chair of the RSB Steering Board And Senior Advisor, Climate and Energy Program, NWF Forestry, Agriculture, and Climate Change: Modeling to Support Policy Analysis Sept 26-29, 2011 GHG Accounting in the RSB Standard

E n e r g y C e n t e r Energy Security What Biofuels are Expected to Deliver Economic Development Employment © iStockphoto.com/Logan Buell © BC Bioenergy Strategy Climate Change Mitigation

E n e r g y C e n t e r Increased deforestation and loss of ecosystems Increased GHG emissions Pollution Increased conflicts over land and resources © Sébastien Haye/Terre des Hommes Suisse © Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels © Sébastien Haye What Biofuels Might also Cause

E n e r g y C e n t e r Trade Offs -  Rural Development/Poverty Reduction - requires protection of small producers vs  Significant Fuel Substitution - requires massive incentives for large scale producers  High Production Per Acre - Requires Use of Good Farm Land, Water, Fossil Fuel Fertilizers vs  Reduction of GHG, Food / Fuel Competition - Requires use of Marginal Land/Wastes/Low inputs.

E n e r g y C e n t e r  In the spotlight for land use pressure  Adds to the impossible Rubik's cube:  Agriculture expansion for export commodities is greatest cause of deforestation, resulting in high GHG emissions  Population growth to over 10 Billion will need MORE  Climate change will challenge current production  And now here comes – not just liquid biofuels – but also ramped up biomass for power  All putting pressure on forests and all other ecosystems Biofuels – the New Kid on the Block photo by Genocide Intervention Network Image by: Aidenvironment, Flickr

E n e r g y C e n t e r  Energy Information Administration projects tripling of biofuels production from 2007 to 2035  Ecofys estimates the land area needed by 2050 for renewable energy scenarios:  250 million hectares of agricultural land (about 1/6 of global cropland) for biofuels  Plus 4.5 billion cubic meters of biomass for power from already disturbed forests  Assumes meat consumption by wealthy cut in half, and the poor increase meat by no more than 25% from today  Assumes increase in intensively managed managed forests and agricultural yields rise Biofuels – The Land Pressure is Real

E n e r g y C e n t e r  All land uses are expanding, not just bioenergy:  Pasture and crop land, cities and suburbs, factories and mines, shopping malls, highways, sports arenas...  Providing resources for future populations should use essentially the current land base – freezing the human footprint in place:  That means intentional land use planning – using land for what it’s most suited for!  Responsible Cultivation Areas concept for agricultural expansion.  In particular, bioenergy should only be produced without conversion of forests and other ecosystems. Any Land Use is in Competition with All Other Land Use

E n e r g y C e n t e r Indirect Impacts of Biofuel Production  Indirect impacts occur when any “provisioning service” (e.g. food, fiber, feed or other harvestable goods such as firewood, pasture, etc.) is diverted to a new use, leaving a “gap” for that product in the global market, which can cause short-term price increases. 1/  1/ Summary: Indirect Impacts and the RSB, Sept

E n e r g y C e n t e r Indirect Impacts of Biofuel Production  There are 3 main ways to close this gap:  Converting additional land to production (extensification)  Increasing yield and/or efficiency increases (intensification and new technology);  Demand might decrease due to the price increase, depending on the price elasticity of the product.

E n e r g y C e n t e r Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) Few « Escapes » from the ILUC Box.  Wastes and residues that need disposal  Restoration of depleted land through biofuels  Multiple products from the same land area  Higher yields from crops and dedicated biofuel lands  Innovative technologies to use less land (algae, etc.)

E n e r g y C e n t e r So What is to be Done?

E n e r g y C e n t e r Option – Law and Policy  US EPA – ILUC Factors for each Feedstock  California – Considering ILUC Factors  EU – Considering Other Options:  Raising minimum GHG saving threshold  Introducing new sustainability requirements  Introducing ILUC Factors  Delay action / Monitor impacts

E n e r g y C e n t e r Option – Voluntary Certification  Commodity Specific Roundtables (Soy, Palm Oil, Sugarcane, Timber/paper) – not yet considering solutions.  Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels (RSB) – Expert Group debating appropriate responses.

E n e r g y C e n t e r Addressing Indirect Impacts in the RSB Add “Module” for Low Indirect Impact Biofuels:  Could be mandatory or optional  Use measures to increase yield  Use co-products and residues to increase the system efficiency  Reduce Land Requirements – use feedstock  From degraded/unused land/restore productivity  Grown on non-arable land without displacing existing provisioning services (e.g., certain algae)  From residues (to sustainable levels of removals) and end- of-life products (wastes without alternative uses).

E n e r g y C e n t e r Addressing Indirect Impacts in the RSB, cont’d.  Use ILUC “Factor” in the GHG Calculation:  ILUC per volume of production  ILUC per hectare of land used  Address Indirect Impacts in the RSB Standard for Risk Management  Contribute to other operators’ increased yields or efficiency  Indirect Impacts Fund – to facilitate investments in agricultural productivity gains in developing countries.

E n e r g y C e n t e r  Enables producers and purchasers to differentiate better biofuels  Covers entire supply chain  Covers all feedstocks and biofuels  “Benchmarking”: working with other standards & regulations  Fulfills “market access standards” for specific regulated markets, i.e. EU Sustainability and Biofuels: The RSB Standard © Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels Global, voluntary, multi-stakeholder standard on sustainability and biofuels – Certification System now open

E n e r g y C e n t e r The RSB Governance RSB Steering Board Chamber 1 - Feedstock Producers (Solazyme, Sun BF, Fedepalma, etc.) Chamber 2 - Biofuel Producers (ADM, BP, Poet, Neste Oil, etc. ) Chamber 3 - Retailers Transport/Investors (Boeing, Airbus, IDB, SAFUG, Shell, etc.) Chamber 4 - NGOs & Trade Unions (ALU-TUCP, NUPAWU, Sucre Ethique, etc.) Chamber 5 - Devt, smallholder & indigenous people organisations (German NGO Forum, Fundacion Solar, MFC, etc.) Chamber 6 - Envt, Conservation & Climate (WWF, IUCN, CI, Wetlands Int, etc.) Chamber 7 - Research, Govt, IGOs (Ministries from Peru, Switzerland; Berkeley, UNEP, FAO, etc.)

E n e r g y C e n t e r A global discussion: RSB members

E n e r g y C e n t e r RSB Principles & Criteria Principle 1: Legality Principle 1: Legality Principle 2: Planning, Monitoring & Continuous Improvement Principle 2: Planning, Monitoring & Continuous Improvement Principle 3: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Principle 3: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Principle 4: Human & Labor Rights Principle 4: Human & Labor Rights Principle 7: Conservat ion Principle 7: Conservat ion Principle 5: Rural & Social Development Principle 5: Rural & Social Development Principle 6: Local Food Security Principle 6: Local Food Security Principle 8: Soil Principle 8: Soil Principle 9: Water Principle 9: Water Principle 10: Air Principle 10: Air Principle 12: Land Rights Principle 12: Land Rights Principle 11: Use of Technology, Inputs, & Management of Waste Principle 11: Use of Technology, Inputs, & Management of Waste

E n e r g y C e n t e r Principle 2:  Stakeholder consultation is essential for the successful application of the RSB standard  Social and Ecological Impact Assessment/management plans  To identify and protect rights and natural resources  Consultation and participation take place at all stages of the process (development and implementation)  Scope is dependent on the potential impacts of the operations and must be:  Open and transparent  In line with the principle of FPIC Stakeholder Consultation and FPIC © Sébastien Haye/Terre des Hommes Suisse

E n e r g y C e n t e r RSB Principles & Criteria Principle Principle 7. “Biofuel operations shall avoid negative impacts on biodiversity, ecosystems, and conservation values.”

E n e r g y C e n t e r Criterion 7.a – Criterion 7.a – “Conservation values of local, regional or global importance within the potential or existing area of operation shall be maintained or enhanced.”  Covers all ecosystem types – not limited to forests.  No conversion of areas with identified conservation values of global, regional or local importance after cut off date of January 1,  No use of such areas without adequate management practices to maintain or enhance such values. Criterion 7.b – Criterion 7.b – “ Ecosystem functions and services that are directly affected by biofuel operations shall be maintained or enhanced.” Criterion 7a

E n e r g y C e n t e r  Principle 5 – rural and social development  Creation of jobs, development of SMEs and out-grower schemes  Improve the quality of life of stakeholders  Principle 6 – local food security  Ensuring that local food security is protected and enhanced  Links with rural development  Principle 9 - Ensuring that water rights are protected Formal and informal rights Water for subsistence purposes Food security, livelihoods and rural development

E n e r g y C e n t e r  Principle 12: Evaluate and respect existing land rights and land-use rights, formal and informal  No involuntary relocations and all land disputes must be settled prior to biofuel development  RSB Guidelines based on best practise that assist operators to do:  Comprehensive stakeholder Engagement  Gender sensitive  Screening process  Land Rights Evaluation if needed Land and Land Use Rights ©istock.com/Vardhan

E n e r g y C e n t e r RSB Principles & Criteria Principle 3. “Biofuels shall contribute to climate change mitigation by significantly reducing lifecycle GHG emissions as compared to fossil fuels.”

E n e r g y C e n t e r  Criterion 3a – Comply with GHG regulations  Criterion 3a – Comply with GHG regulations.  Biofuel operators must meet GHG regulations in the markets where they operate, e.g. o U.S. RFS II o California LCFS o EU Renewable Energy Directive (EU RED) o RSB has begun benchmarking of existing biofuel regulations & GHG requirements Criterion 3a

E n e r g y C e n t e r  Criterion 3b – GHG Emissions: calculate lifecycle GHG emissions  Criterion 3b – GHG Emissions: Operators must use RSB GHG methodology to calculate lifecycle GHG emissions associated with their operations o RSB/EMPA developed GHG accounting methodology; final version published in July 2011 actual use o For energy & material inputs – operators report actual use not default values  In RSB system all Operators must calculate GHG contribution of their operations–enter into RSB Tool  RSB Tool enables GHG number from each stage of production to be passed along from operator to operator down the chain of production  Biofuel Blender reports on the Total (lifecycle) GHG emissions Criterion 3b

E n e r g y C e n t e r  Attributional lifecycle methodology  Follows economic allocation for co-products  Users enter their own data  Material use (e.g., type and amount of fertilizer)  Energy use (e.g. amount of diesel, natural gas or electricity used, etc.)  Location (which affects some emission factors)  Embedded emission factors come largely from the LCA database Ecoinvent (e.g., CO2 emissions per kg methanol used in biodiesel production) GHG Methodology

E n e r g y C e n t e r  The methodology uses a database of options for materials, chemicals and energy types, and associated emission factors  For example, RSB Tool contains a drop-down list of fertilizers  Land use and land use change information is largely based on IPCC methodology with some modifications  uses specific data (e.g., carbon stocks) for certain crops (e.g., miscanthus, sugarcane)  All documentation is available in the RSB GHG Methodology document -- see GHG Methodology (Cont’d)

E n e r g y C e n t e r  Criterion 3c – GHG Threshold GHG emissions by 50%  Criterion 3c – GHG Threshold : Biofuel blends must reduce GHG emissions by 50% compared to the fossil fuel baseline of the fuel they would replace o Fossil fuel baseline: o Global average o Recalculated every 5 years o Different for gasoline, diesel, jet o Final biofuel or physical blend of biofuels must meet the 50% GHG emission requirement  Operators who must meet GHG Threshold: Final Biofuel Blenders Criterion 3c

E n e r g y C e n t e r  RSB Tool (online, freely available)  User friendly application tool  Operators can self-assess their compliance with RSB Standards  Check compliance with other GHG & Sustainability Regulations  Enables GHG calculations (RSB, EU RED, etc.) – user enters own data RSB Tool

E n e r g y C e n t e r Research Needs for Improved Models  Assess options for RSB ILUC tools:  What is validity of per hectare vs per volume ILUC “factors”?  What are effective “ILUC mitigation” incentives”?  What is relationship between “ILUC mitigation” and “land sparing”?  Are there effective incentives that would work for smallholders?

E n e r g y C e n t e r Barbara Bramble: RSB Secretariat: © iStockphoto.com/Nancy Tripp Thank you!