The guidelines, which were published earlier this month by the new energy commissioner Günther Oettinger, are aimed at showing that the label ‘Recognised by the European Union’ shows that the biofuel carrying the label is making a genuine contribution to reducing global warming. Oettinger wants biofuel production companies – both EU and non-EU – to apply to use the label by the end of this year.
The publication is an attempt at clarification of the sustainability criteria that accompany the EU’s Renewable Energy and Fuel Quality Drectives. 10% of transport fuels are supposed to come from renewable sources, mostly biofuels, by 2020. But the production of some biofuels involves such side-effects that their overall impact is to increase greenhouse gas emissions compared with oil-derived petrol and diesel.
The new guidelines also rectify one earlier suggestion that palm oil plantations could be viewed as forests and therefore count as sustainable, a move criticised by Great Britain, the Netherlands and Denmark as well as by environmental NGOs. That has now been removed so forests and peatlands should not be cleared for biofuel crops, as this releases more carbon dioxide than is saved.
T&E policy officer Nusa Urbancic said, ‘These new guidelines don’t really take us any further, because they still don’t deal with indirect land-use change, which is the elephant in the room when it comes to the environmental impact of biofuels. Until the EU deals with this issue – and the Commission has to address it by the end of this year – any statements that biofuels are sustainable will be misleading, counterproductive, and destined for failure.’
The American scientist Tim Searchinger has published another article on indirect land-use change. Writing in the magazine ERL, Searchinger said the impact of ‘Iluc’ meant that only biofuels that absorb additional carbon could be beneficial from the point of view of using biofuels in combating climate change.
The Commission has until 4 July to respond to a legal challenge brought by T&E and three other NGOs. The action says the Commission broke its own access to information rules by refusing to release documents requested by T&E, which detail the impact of indirect land-use change, within the Commission’s own timeframe.
