Indirect land use change and biofuels: Mathematical analysis reveals a fundamental flaw in the regulatory approach

Seungdo Kim, Bruce E. Dale, Reinout Heijungs, Adisa Azapagic, Tom Darlington, Dennis Kahlbaum

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    • 3 Citations

    Abstract

    In the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2) program, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has used partial equilibrium models to estimate the overall indirect land use change (iLUC) associated with the biofuel scenario mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). For regulatory purposes, the U.S. EPA "shocks" (changes) the amount of each biofuel in the economic models one at a time to estimate the threshold values for specific biofuels (single-shock analysis). The primary assumption in the single-shock analysis is that iLUC is a linear process with respect to biofuels, i.e., that interactions between different biofuels are trivially small. However, the assumption of linearity in the single-shock analysis is not appropriate for estimating the threshold values for specific biofuels when the interactions between different biofuels are not small.Numerical results from the RFS2 program show that the effects of interactions between different biofuels are too large to be ignored. Thus, the threshold values for specific biofuels determined by the U.S. EPA are scenario-dependent and value choice-driven. They do not reflect real impacts of specific biofuels. Using scenario-dependent values for regulation is arbitrary and inappropriate. Failure to deal appropriately with interactions between different biofuels when assigning iLUC values to specific biofuels is a mathematical and systematic flaw; it is not an "uncertainty" issue. The U.S. EPA should find better ways to differentiate the contribution of one biofuel versus another when assigning iLUC values or find better means of regulating the land use change impact of biofuel production.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)408-412
    Number of pages5
    JournalBiomass and Bioenergy
    Volume71
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Dec 1 2014

    Profile

    biofuel
    Biofuels
    biofuels
    land use change
    Land use
    environmental protection
    Environmental Protection Agency
    Defects
    regulatory approach
    mathematical analysis
    linearity
    economics
    energy
    Economics
    econometric models
    uncertainty

    Keywords

    • Biofuel policy
    • Corn ethanol
    • Indirect land use change
    • Renewable fuel standard
    • Soybean Biodiesel
    • Sugarcane ethanol

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Agronomy and Crop Science
    • Forestry
    • Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
    • Waste Management and Disposal

    Cite this

    Indirect land use change and biofuels : Mathematical analysis reveals a fundamental flaw in the regulatory approach. / Kim, Seungdo; Dale, Bruce E.; Heijungs, Reinout; Azapagic, Adisa; Darlington, Tom; Kahlbaum, Dennis.

    In: Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 71, 01.12.2014, p. 408-412.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Kim, Seungdo; Dale, Bruce E.; Heijungs, Reinout; Azapagic, Adisa; Darlington, Tom; Kahlbaum, Dennis / Indirect land use change and biofuels : Mathematical analysis reveals a fundamental flaw in the regulatory approach.

    In: Biomass and Bioenergy, Vol. 71, 01.12.2014, p. 408-412.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{b76771a5efba4536a4dab0cd8338a935,
    title = "Indirect land use change and biofuels: Mathematical analysis reveals a fundamental flaw in the regulatory approach",
    abstract = "In the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2) program, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has used partial equilibrium models to estimate the overall indirect land use change (iLUC) associated with the biofuel scenario mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). For regulatory purposes, the U.S. EPA {"}shocks{"} (changes) the amount of each biofuel in the economic models one at a time to estimate the threshold values for specific biofuels (single-shock analysis). The primary assumption in the single-shock analysis is that iLUC is a linear process with respect to biofuels, i.e., that interactions between different biofuels are trivially small. However, the assumption of linearity in the single-shock analysis is not appropriate for estimating the threshold values for specific biofuels when the interactions between different biofuels are not small.Numerical results from the RFS2 program show that the effects of interactions between different biofuels are too large to be ignored. Thus, the threshold values for specific biofuels determined by the U.S. EPA are scenario-dependent and value choice-driven. They do not reflect real impacts of specific biofuels. Using scenario-dependent values for regulation is arbitrary and inappropriate. Failure to deal appropriately with interactions between different biofuels when assigning iLUC values to specific biofuels is a mathematical and systematic flaw; it is not an {"}uncertainty{"} issue. The U.S. EPA should find better ways to differentiate the contribution of one biofuel versus another when assigning iLUC values or find better means of regulating the land use change impact of biofuel production.",
    keywords = "Biofuel policy, Corn ethanol, Indirect land use change, Renewable fuel standard, Soybean Biodiesel, Sugarcane ethanol",
    author = "Seungdo Kim and Dale, {Bruce E.} and Reinout Heijungs and Adisa Azapagic and Tom Darlington and Dennis Kahlbaum",
    year = "2014",
    month = "12",
    doi = "10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.09.015",
    volume = "71",
    pages = "408--412",
    journal = "Biomass and Bioenergy",
    issn = "0961-9534",
    publisher = "Elsevier Limited",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Indirect land use change and biofuels

    T2 - Biomass and Bioenergy

    AU - Kim,Seungdo

    AU - Dale,Bruce E.

    AU - Heijungs,Reinout

    AU - Azapagic,Adisa

    AU - Darlington,Tom

    AU - Kahlbaum,Dennis

    PY - 2014/12/1

    Y1 - 2014/12/1

    N2 - In the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2) program, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has used partial equilibrium models to estimate the overall indirect land use change (iLUC) associated with the biofuel scenario mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). For regulatory purposes, the U.S. EPA "shocks" (changes) the amount of each biofuel in the economic models one at a time to estimate the threshold values for specific biofuels (single-shock analysis). The primary assumption in the single-shock analysis is that iLUC is a linear process with respect to biofuels, i.e., that interactions between different biofuels are trivially small. However, the assumption of linearity in the single-shock analysis is not appropriate for estimating the threshold values for specific biofuels when the interactions between different biofuels are not small.Numerical results from the RFS2 program show that the effects of interactions between different biofuels are too large to be ignored. Thus, the threshold values for specific biofuels determined by the U.S. EPA are scenario-dependent and value choice-driven. They do not reflect real impacts of specific biofuels. Using scenario-dependent values for regulation is arbitrary and inappropriate. Failure to deal appropriately with interactions between different biofuels when assigning iLUC values to specific biofuels is a mathematical and systematic flaw; it is not an "uncertainty" issue. The U.S. EPA should find better ways to differentiate the contribution of one biofuel versus another when assigning iLUC values or find better means of regulating the land use change impact of biofuel production.

    AB - In the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2) program, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has used partial equilibrium models to estimate the overall indirect land use change (iLUC) associated with the biofuel scenario mandated by the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA). For regulatory purposes, the U.S. EPA "shocks" (changes) the amount of each biofuel in the economic models one at a time to estimate the threshold values for specific biofuels (single-shock analysis). The primary assumption in the single-shock analysis is that iLUC is a linear process with respect to biofuels, i.e., that interactions between different biofuels are trivially small. However, the assumption of linearity in the single-shock analysis is not appropriate for estimating the threshold values for specific biofuels when the interactions between different biofuels are not small.Numerical results from the RFS2 program show that the effects of interactions between different biofuels are too large to be ignored. Thus, the threshold values for specific biofuels determined by the U.S. EPA are scenario-dependent and value choice-driven. They do not reflect real impacts of specific biofuels. Using scenario-dependent values for regulation is arbitrary and inappropriate. Failure to deal appropriately with interactions between different biofuels when assigning iLUC values to specific biofuels is a mathematical and systematic flaw; it is not an "uncertainty" issue. The U.S. EPA should find better ways to differentiate the contribution of one biofuel versus another when assigning iLUC values or find better means of regulating the land use change impact of biofuel production.

    KW - Biofuel policy

    KW - Corn ethanol

    KW - Indirect land use change

    KW - Renewable fuel standard

    KW - Soybean Biodiesel

    KW - Sugarcane ethanol

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84911896552&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84911896552&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.09.015

    DO - 10.1016/j.biombioe.2014.09.015

    M3 - Article

    VL - 71

    SP - 408

    EP - 412

    JO - Biomass and Bioenergy

    JF - Biomass and Bioenergy

    SN - 0961-9534

    ER -