1. A Geography Based Critique of New US Biofuels Regulations Stewart Fast, Marc Saner, Mike Brklacich IUCN Academy of Environmental Law Conference June 10, 2011, Ottawa

2. Renewable Fuel Standard 2 & GHG savings from biofuel only corn ethanol fuel that reduces GHG 20% compared to gasoline allowed (EISA 2007) EPA assessment to determine qualifying fuels Concluded all corn ethanol processed in a natural gas fired refinery qualifies

3. What evidence supports this rule?

4. From: US EPA Regulatory Impact Analysis RFS2 2010

5. Issue #1 : National treatment of biomass production emissions Emissions from fertilizers, fuels for machinery, energy to dry grain, pesticides, yields collapsed into single national value BUT dozens of categories of ethanol refinery types modeled

6. Issue #2 : Consequential LCA EPA attempts to model consequences of policy in terms of greenhouse gas emissions for the year 2022 Multiple assumptions including constant corn yield improvement without additional fertilizer

7. From: US EPA Draft Regulatory Impact Analysis RFS2 2009

8. Real-world data Eight US Counties (Kim et al 2009) Three – fold difference in emissions between counties What happens to the end fuel emissions if corn from each of these counties is processed in a new natural gas fired refinery?

10. So what? Some locations meet target others don’t Quantities of field inputs highly variable EPA misses opportunity to regulation on basis of less intensive GHG farming If corn belt is so variable what confidence that projections to 2022 are valid?

11. When disaggregate to farm level See some farms do things that others do not (e.g., tilling versus no-tilling) Frequencies of field activities are missed

12. GHG emissions due to production of grain corn for corn ethanol as projected by EPA (2010) and as observed and calculated by Kim et al. (2009) and by our own study Projected emissions for the year 2022 (EPA 2010c) Observed emissions for eight corn belt counties for years 2000 –2003 (Kim et al. 2009) Observed emissions for S.Ont and E.Ont sites for years 2006-2008 (our field data) GHG Emissions in g CO 2eq / MJ 9.7830.2 – 98.217.3 – 36.5 Additional emissions from transport, land use change, ethanol refinery ~ 65 % change compared to gasoline - 20%+ 2 % to + 75% - 11% to + 9.1 %

13. Our conclusion EPA claim of a 20% reduction in emissions not supportable geography of growing biomass too diverse

14. Why has geography of biomass production emissions been ignored? Remember life cycle assessment method employed as political response to scientific criticism Choice to focus on refinery compromise least offensive and the easiest to administer

16. Alternative approaches for the RFS requirement to assess 20% reduction require fertilizer and fuel reporting of farmers when shipping grain to ethanol refinery and incorporate into emissions calculation regularly completed life cycle assessments for suite of representative farms close to regional norms

17. Final thought Claims of a single number unsupportable in current approach Decision based evidence making? “EPA’s LCA analysis reflects the best available science, and is an adequate basis for the regulatory determination for which it is used – determining compliance with the GHG thresholds.” Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2) Summary and Analysis of Comments (Feb 2010)

18. Thank you sfast082@uottawa.ca Kim S, Dale B, Jenkins R (2009) Life cycle assessment of corn grain and corn stover in the United States. International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment 14 160 -174