Download How will the United States calculate the climate impact of bioenergy?

How will the United States
calculate the climate impact
of bioenergy?
Dennis Becker
Associate Professor
University of Minnesota
Do Americans believe in climate change?
Is there solid evidence the earth is warming?
Yes, solid evidence
the earth is warming
62% Norwegian
forest owners
(May 2013)
Warming mostly because
of human activity
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
PEW RESEARCH CENTER, March 13-17, 2013
Will Americans do anything about it?
What kind of priority do you think Obama and the Congress
should give … (percent saying highest priority)
the economy
reducing federal spending
restructuring the federal
tax system
enacting stricter gun-control laws
slowing rate of growth in spending on
Medicare and Social Security
addressing gun violence
addressing immigration issues
addressing global warming/ climate change
Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted Jan 10-13, 2013 among random national sample of 1,001 adults
Will Americans do anything about it?
Should the federal government regulate the release of GHGs
from power plants, cars and factories to reduce global warming?
All adults
8% Somewhat 13% Strongly
Democrat
Republican
Independent
The Washington Post - Kaiser Family Foundation poll, July 25 – August 5, 2012
Will Americans do anything about it?
FIRST NATION
THE MIDLANDS
THE LEFT
COAST
THE FAR WEST
YANKEEDOM
YANKEEDOM
NEW
NETHERLAND
THE MIDLANDS
GREATER APPALACHIA
EL NORTE
NEW FRANCE
TIDEWATER
DEEP SOUTH
NEW FRANCE
PART OF THE
SPANISH
CARIBBEAN
Woodard, C. 2011. American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America
1970
Clean Air Act – requires EPA to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants from
Biogenic Carbon Policy Timeline
stationary and mobile sources;
– “best available control technology” (BACT) provisions;
– does NOT accommodate temporal aspects of sequestration
2007
US Supreme Court orders EPA to regulate GHGs (“endangerment”)
2010
“Tailoring Rule” adopted – allows exemption of facilities by tonnage of C emitted,
not source (e.g., biomass, fossil fuels)
2011
3-year deferral – delayed permitting of biogenic C to conduct examination
– establish Accounting Framework, and Science Advisory Board
2012
Science Advisory Board – recommendations for biogenic C accounting
2013
Deferral vacated by a federal court decision
New Source Performance Standards – regulations for new coal and gas-fired
electricity; rules for existing facilities by 2014; biomass exempted
2014
Revised Tailoring Rule – how will EPA accommodate temporal aspects without
Congressional action (new Act vs. de-authorizing EPA)??
Science Advisory Board Observations

Task … restricted to biogenic carbon from stationary
facilities; did not assess attributional impacts

Carbon neutrality … cannot be assumed a priori

IPCC reporting convention … does not link stationary
sources to their emissions; net carbon stock approach

EPA Biogenic Accounting Framework



does not consider impacts over different time scales
net carbon stock approach (regional reference points)
would exempt facilities by location, not by emissions
holding facilities responsible for carbon leakage
(e.g., LUC) does not reduce overall emissions
Recommendations to EPA

Default equations … by feedstock category, region,
prior land use, current management practices
 Applied at facility-level
 Facilities can demonstrate lower emissions

Anticipated baseline … compare emissions from
increased harvesting against baseline
 Include soil sequestration and natural decay rates
 Consider alternate fates of residues/diverted wastes

Various time scales … incorporate tradeoffs of
different time scales (C-plus)

Supplementary policies … to reduce carbon leakage
based on assessment of directionality if not magnitude
Current Debate





Temporal issues difficult to rectify – radiative forcing, albedo, etc
Incorporating periodic loss events – fire, insects, and disease
Transparency – clear and consistent reference conditions
EPA struggling to connect biogenic emissions to a defensible
Clean Air Act regulation – although biomass qualifies as “BACT”
Facility-level LCA calculations would slow progress; lack consistent
system boundaries and data
Other Important Developments:
“Surrogate” Climate Policy – Federal






Renewable Fuels Standard – 16 billion gal cellulosic
biofuels by 2022
Production & Investment Tax Credits – open-looped:
1.1¢/kWh; closed-looped: 2.2¢/kWh
Farm Bill (Energy Title) – community biomass heating;
biomass procurement and sourcing
Vehicle fuel standards – new vehicle emissions down
19% since 2007
BTU Act (proposed) – thermal tax parity; efficiency
Clean Energy Standard (proposed)
Feedstock
source
Form of energy
Fossil fuel
displaced
Forest
management
Other Important Developments:
“Surrogate” Climate Policy – States







370+ state bioenergy policies and programs –
mostly tax incentives targeting production
Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) – 36 states
Net metering – energy buy-back in 47 states
AB32 California – cap on GHGs; LULUC limits
Massachusetts RPS – links RECs to combustion
efficiency; LULUC limits
Biomass harvest guidelines (site-level) – 15 states
Forest certification – 50+ million hectares third-party
certified (PEFC endorsed)
Feedstock
source
Form of energy
Fossil fuel
displaced
Forest
management
For more information contact:
Dennis R. Becker
Associate Professor
Department of Forest Resources
University of Minnesota
[email protected]
612.624.7286
Faculty Website:
http://www.forestry.umn.edu/People/Becker/index.htm
Policy Related Research:
http://enrpolicy.forestry.umn.edu/Research/BiomassBioenergyClimate/index.htm