Chapter 8: Conclusion
The first and most important way to meet our energy needs is to increase conservation and efficiency. The cheapest, most sustainable energy is the energy we never have to produce. To meet a portion of remaining energy needs, biofuels – if done right – are an important part of the equation. They can be used within our existing infrastructure to help wean us off of oil, while simultaneously improving the quality of our environment. However if done wrong, biofuels could simply compound many of our environmental problems and exchange one kind of unsustainable energy for another.
With the proper incentives and awareness of these issues, Oregon has the potential for substantial (though limited) biofuels production. An Oregon biofuels industry can support local economic development, reduce oil dependence, improve the environment, and reduce Oregon’s global warming footprint.
Principles for Making Renewable Fuels Sustainable
Adhering to the following principles will help biofuels live up to their potential as green, renewable fuels.
Support only biofuels that reduce greenhouse gas emissions on a life cycle assessment basis: To ensure that biofuels are in fact reducing global warming pollution, the full greenhouse gas impact of specific biofuels needs to be accurately assessed using a methodology that is updated as the science improves. To the extent possible, agricultural emissions and land use changes need to be fully accounted for. Biofuels should be required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions compared to petroleum in order to qualify for state incentives, and an incentive system that will encourage the development of increasingly more climate-friendly biofuels should be put in place.
- Process biofuels with minimum fossil fuel inputs: Incentives to encourage plants to use biomass, wind, solar or other renewable energy should be put in place. No state incentives should be available for biofuels plants that rely on coal to power their facility.
- Protect air and water quality: Careful monitoring of both tailpipe emissions and localized impacts of biorefinery operations on air and water quality will be required. State policies should be informed by the evolving understanding of these impacts.
- Grow biofuel feedstocks using sustainable agricultural practices: To avoid negative impacts on water and soil quality, farmers should use best agricultural practices – including minimal chemical fertilizer and pesticide inputs, buffer zones on waterways, and conservation tillage.
- Conserve water: The total water use for plants and irrigation should be carefully considered before sourcing feedstocks or locating biofuels production facilities. Incentives to encourage water conservation should be implemented, and research should be done to identify and develop drought-resistant feedstocks.
- Protect biodiversity: Biofuel and bioenergy production poses a range of threats to biodiversity if habitat is disturbed. Impacts on native species should be carefully considered as the industry develops.
- Avoid conversion of native ecosystems: Converting native grasslands or forests to agriculture, short-rotation woody crops, or tree plantations eliminates any greenhouse gas benefits from even advanced biofuels and does serious harm to biodiversity.
- Support socially responsible and locally owned biofuels production: Local communities have the greatest investment in their environment. Encouraging local input, ownership and control of biofuel production will help ensure real sustainability.
- Provide consumer information: Biofuel producers should be required to provide sufficient information on feedstocks and production practices to allow consumers to make an informed decision about which biofuels they purchase. Ideally, there would be a system of either voluntary or mandatory labeling that indicates the greenhouse gas balance, if not more detailed environmental and social criteria.
Policy Models
Appendix I lists the policy recommendations that have been presented in this report. The ideal policy would provide strong incentives across the board for the use of best practices during both feedstock production and biorefining. While this may seem daunting, there are already several strong models to follow.
First, there are several federal programs that outline best practices for agriculture that would go a long way towards mitigating any negative effects of biofuels, particularly the Conservation Security Program. Ideally, in order for biofuels to qualify for any state incentives or mandates, including triggering the Oregon’s Renewable Fuel Standard, they should be required to be produced with at least some use of these best practices. These restrictions would fall on the producers of biofuels, who would be required to purchase feedstock only from farms that meet the requirements. One possibility would be to require the use of feedstock produced consistent with Conservation Security Program Tier I standards as an absolute minimum for tax breaks, and provide extra incentives to producers who use feedstocks produced in a way that meets the more rigorous Tier II or Tier III standards. Oregon is also home to three internationally respected third-party certification programs – Food Alliance, Oregon Tilth and Salmon-Safe – which provide recognition to farmers who adhere to a set of environmentally and socially responsible practices. Farmers growing feedstock certified by these programs should also be eligible for the same tax breaks provided for feedstock grown consistent with the Conservation Security Program.
Another strong model for addressing the sustainability of biofuels in a comprehensive manner is the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation in the UK, which will require renewable fuels to meet minimum GHG and environmental and social sustainability requirements to qualify for the mandate.
Another major policy innovation is California’s Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS). While GHG emissions don’t capture all of the environmental impacts, they do provide a solid proxy for a wide range of issues. The LCFS is technology neutral; it allows blenders and fuel providers to reduce GHG emissions through any means possible, including improving oil production efficiency or the use of biofuels or other technologies. The use of an opt-in system, which creates an incentive for but does not require reporting, ensures that best practices are credited without providing an unnecessary regulatory burden. By creating a high-value market for renewable fuels that provide the highest greenhouse gas improvements and associated environmental benefits, an Oregon LCFS would help focus technological innovation on sustainability and increase Oregon’s already strong comparative advantage in this critical area.
As these examples show, despite the complexities of biofuels, innovative policymaking and American technological innovation can combine to get them right. Oregon, with its strong history of environmental leadership, has an opportunity to be a real leader in the development of sustainable bioenergy. Leadership on this issue today will help ensure that Oregon’s vast natural heritage, as well as that of the rest of the world, will be intact for generations to come.
