What are the biggest obstacles when trying to set criteria for verified sustainable ethanol?
– How to find manageable indicators that different types of producers can comply with and to create a system where all can be included. For a small producer it is more difficult to comply with these kinds of criteria than for a large-scale producer. Once you have the standard in place, other obstacles are to sort out who pays for it
and who is verifying it.
What are the best ways to cope with these difficulties?
– One way is to use already existing industry standards within a meta-standard system, like in the UK. This way, you do not have to reinvent the wheel. It will be easier for the producers to comply with the criteria within a meta-standard if they can use the standard in the system that they are already within.
– Or, maybe in some cases, systems have to be set case by case, which is more difficult and very time consuming. But it gives you the chance to really follow the whole supply chain for the product and be sure that the criteria have been applied properly.
What criteria would you like to set for sustainable bioethanol?
– If you want to apply every single thing it gets more and more complicated. The ideal system is balanced between environmental and social criteria and includes some economic issues. At present, the certification systems include biodiversity, water, soil and greenhouse gases accountability. In terms of social criteria, they include gender, workers’ rights and land use. Some include property rights and some not, but this is probably most important for developing countries.
– Considerations on indirect land use change are important but there is still ongoing research on this. If you are changing what you are planting for a new product you may affect other products in other places, for example food production.
Please tell us more about the different ecolabels or accreditation systems for
bioethanol.
– Of the systems already in place, the only one set by a government is the UK system, RTFO. It requires that fuel companies in the UK report on greenhouse gases and sustainability for the biofuels they sell. In Sweden, SEKAB is a company that has set its own criteria and has a verifier on that. This is fine because it is a commitment from a private company, but it does not contain all the principles.
– The Round Table on Sustainable Palm Oil and the Round Table of Sustainable Soya are a bit broader in their approach but the Roundtable on Sustainable Biofuels (RSB) is focused on biofuels. This is the only system that is really global. In August 2008, the RSB released their first draft on principles and criteria, which is open until February 2009 for comments.
Several other actors also develop systems:
– The Cramer Criteria in the Netherlands are also from the government but not legally in place yet. In Germany there is an ordinance on sustainability regulation that is on hold until the new EU directive is published and the State of California also has some work on this topic. Both the UN and the EU are working on their own systems.
What system do you find the best of the existing ones and why?
– The UK system and the one from the RSB. They are related to meta-standards so that the producers can use other already available certification systems. And they are open for improvement.
How is the interest from ethanol producers for the certification
systems?
– Many producers want to comply with it but do not agree with trade barriers. Most producers also complain about the social criteria. The Brazilian producers have been doing quite well in terms of environmental criteria, but there are still problems with the workers’ rights in some areas. And they are now facing the problem of indirect land use change that they will have to deal with.
How many more years will it take until all bioethanol used for fuel is verified sustainable ethanol?
– About three to five years globally. The one question that is holding the development back is the question on indirect land use change. If we cannot solve this there will always be a problem within the debate of whether we are producing sustainable biofuels that are not affecting food prices. We also need to have a global system if we want to have a more global market of biofuels. Each country having its own system does not facilitate this.
Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation
In the UK, a new biofuel regulation came into force in April 2008. The Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) is the world’s first government biofuel certification scheme.
It puts an obligation on transport fuel suppliers to ensure that a certain percentage – 5% by 2010 – of their fuel are biofuels. The companies are also required to report on carbon emission savings and environmental and social sustainability for the biofuels they supply, but so far there is no government target for social sustainability.
– This reflects the current shortage of certification schemes that meet the RFA’s social sustainability principles, though we anticipate that new standards will increasingly address these aspects in response to growing demand, says Aaron Berry, Head of Carbon and Sustainability for the RFA.
In October 2008, the first report on the RTFO was published by the Renewable Fuels Agency (RFA). It shows that biofuels accounted for 2.61%, somewhat more than the fuel companies’ obligation (2.5%). Some 84% of the biofuels were biodiesel and 16% were bioethanol.
The overall percentage of fuel reported as sustainable was 20%, which is less than the target of 30% for the reporting year. The carbon reduction achieved was 44%, which is greater than the 40% target. This however, excludes any emissions from indirect changes in land-use.
– The RFA recommends that indirect effects are included in future sustainability reporting, and we are working with the government and experts to identify a way to do this, says Aaron Berry.
Read more: follow links in the right column on this page
Verified sustainbale ethanol
The Swedish ethanol company SEKAB started selling the world’s first verified sustainable ethanol (E85 and ED95) from Brazil in August 2008. In the first three months, 58 million litres of E85 were sold in Sweden.
The criteria have been developed together with Brazilian producers and include the entire production chain for environmental and social sustainability.
– It has been important for us that the criteria do not hamper free trade or the development of the biofuel, says Anders Fredriksson, vice president at SEKAB, which delivers 90% of all E85 in Sweden. An independent international company monitors the production in Brazil in order to ensure that the requirements within the verification system are met.
– This is just a first step. We want to gradually raise the bar over the coming years and synchronise the criteria with international regulations when these are in place, Anders Fredriksson says.
Read more: follow links in the right column on this page
Nordic Swan
Since August 2008, the independent organisation Nordic Ecolabel certifies biofuels and thus also allows the distributor to use the ecolabel “The Swan” when marketing the fuel.
The criteria include reduced emissions of greenhouse gases and limits on energy use in production. Ethanol, biodiesel, biogas or a mixture of these fuels can apply for the ecolabel. Before deciding on the criteria for the label, 300 organisations were asked about their opinion.
– The two hot issues concerned the production as such and the food question. We must consider the whole production chain, not only the fuel, and we do not accept grains as a raw material for fuel before we know more about how it effects the global food supply, says Ragnar Unge, CEO, Nordic Ecolabel.
In November 2008, methane for vehicles from the company FordonsGas Sverige AB was the first fuel to receive The Swan label.
– There is a big interest also from ethanol importers and retailers but no one has yet applied for the ecolabel. I think they struggle with the criteria for traceability of crops and certified sustainable farming, says Ragnar Unge.
Read more: follow links in the right column on this page