Biocarburantii in 2014: UE bifeaza inca un an de incertitudini Bio-fuels in EU 2014 – Another Year of Regulatory Uncertainty
Un parcurs anevoios si controversat se intrevede pentru legislatia carburantilor ecologici in Uniunea Europeana, ca urmare a lipsei de acord politic in urma desfasurarii Consiliului pentru Energie din 12 decembrie 2013 in privinta propunerii care vizeaza amendarea Directivei 2009/28/CE pentru promovarea utilizarii energiei din surse regenerabile. Viitorul incert al biocarburantilor se afla sub presiunea opozitiei puternice atat din partea grupurilor de lobby de mediu, cat si a industriei carburantilor ecologici. Un pachet legislativ ferm care sa nu inhibe cresterea economica, dar care sa incurajeze tranzitia spre carburantii de a doua generatie si sa sustina obiectivele UE in politica de mediu si energie, se lasa in continuare asteptat.
2014 se anunta un an complicat atat pentru legislatia biocarburantilor, cat si pentru industria de profil. in parte, acest aspect este pus pe seama alegerilor pentru Parlamentul European care reprezinta o miza politica foarte mare in UE, prin urmare, un astfel de context aloca un spatiu redus de dezbatere temelor economice. Pe de alta parte, Comisia Europeana va avea un nou esalon politic si un nou presedinte pana la finalul anului. Cu alte cuvinte, un acord in ceea ce priveste Directiva pentru Energia Regenerabila (RED) este putin probabil sa se atinga mai devreme de mijlocul anului 2015.
in analiza biocarburantilor, doua niveluri de actiune politica sunt luate in calcul: (1) grupurile de decizie la nivel institutional UE, (2) grupurile de lobby.
(1) grupurile de decizie la nivel institutional UE constau in: i. delegatiile statelor membre in Consiliul Uniunii Europene, care la nivel executiv au mandatul de a negocia si ajunge la acord politic; ii. membrii Parlamentului European, in mod particular cei din comitetele ITRE (industrie, tehnologie, cercetare si energie) si ENVI (mediu, sanatate publica si alimentara), care exercita un mandat legislativ in forul Parlamentului; iii. Comisia Europeana, cea care schiteaza strategia de mediu a UE, printre care se numara si obiectivul de 10% privind energia din surse regenerabile in transporturi;
(2) grupurile de lobby se impart in: i. grupurile de mediu/ecologiste care recurg la campanii media in scopul convingerii opiniei publice de amprenta negativa a biocombustibililor conventionali*; aceste grupuri se bucura de un larg suport in tarile UE si au beneficiat de nenumarate ori de suportul membrilor Parlamentului European pentru initiative, simple fantezii ecologiste, care afecteaza competitivitatea economica a UE in raport cu alti actori internationali (Partidul Ecologist European are un numar de 48 de mandate, sustinuti in actiunile lor politice si de socialistii din cadrul PES si cateodata europarlamentari ai ALDE; de asemenea, de notat este ca raportorul pentru biocarburanti este vocala europarlamentara Corinne Lepage, membra ALDE); ii. grupurile de lobby ale industriei biocarburantilor isi doresc investitii in tehnologie si inovare, se confrunta cu eticheta de mari poluatori, au suportul comitetului ITRE;
Grupurile de mediu se opun celor din industria biocarburantilor din diferite motive. Pe de o parte, ecologistii sprijina obiectivele de reducere a emisiilor CO2 si si-au exprimat deaprobarea fata de politica biocarburantilor practicata de UE, reclamand lipsa convergentei si a unui angajament clar in politica de mediu. Lobby-ul ecologist se constituie intr-o retea complexa de agentii, birouri, organizatii, ONG-uri, cele mai multe dintre ele activand din Bruxelles, si care beneficiaza de o finantare consistenta in actiunile lor pe termen lung. Pe de alta parte, industria biocarburantilor este interesata sa isi maximizeze profiturile si sa obtina sprijinul extinderii pietei europene pentru combustibilii eco. Acestia subliniaza faptul ca, in prezent producerea biocarburantilor avansati** implica costuri ridicate, si o scadere nerealista a pragului pentru cei conventionali ar destabiliza vizibil economia deja afectata de criza.
Evolutii politice recente
Pe 12 decembrie 2013, la intalnirea Consiliului pentru Energie, Presedintia Lituaniana a prezentat pozitia sa de compromis legata de propunerea Comisiei de a amenda RED. in ceea ce priveste evolutiile viitoare pe acest subiect, dezacordul statelor membre este descurajant. Compromisul prevedea atingerea unui prag de 7% pentru biocarburantii produsi din cereale pana in anul 2020 si monitorizarea impactului factorilor poluatori cauzati de schimbarile indirecte de utilizare a terenurilor (ILUC factors – indirect land use change). in plus, s-a fixat un prag discretionar pentru biocarburantii de a doua generatie produsi din deseuri si reziduuri.
in timpul conferintei de presa care a urmat intalnirii, Ministrul Energiei lituanian, Jaroslav Neverovič, a evaluat dezbaterile ca fiind productive si cu rezultate bune. Neverovič a subliniat ca Presedintia Lituaniana a UE a prezentat un text compact si bine structurat, in pofida faptului ca acesta nu a intrunit lung-asteptatul acord politic in Consiliu din cauza statelor membre care nu si-au depasit inca rezervele in privinta pachetului legislativ.
Este important de punctat faptul ca, pe parcursul negocierilor care au trenat pe intreaga perioada a Presedintiei Irlandeze a UE din primul semestru al anului 2013, statele membre au exprimat numeroase ingrijorari in privinta pragului fixat pentru biocarburantii conventionali. Se poate argumenta astfel: pe de o parte, cresterea pragului de la 5%, cat este acesta prevazut in RED, la 7%, cat a fost propus in textul de compromis spre dezbatere in Consiliu, submineaza eforturile de a limita amprenta negativa asupra mediului a biocarburantilor conventionali. Pe de alta parte, fixarea unui prag discretionar in ceea ce priveste biocarburantii avansati, incurajeaza statele membre sa dezvolte aceasta industrie care ar avea bune rezultate in atingerea obiectivului de scadere a emisiilor CO2 cu scopul de a atinge cei 10% energie din surse regenerabile in transporturi.
Un parcurs controversat de 4 ani pentru biocombustibili in UE
Desi adoptata in 2009, Comisia Europeana a anuntat revizuirea RED in octombrie 2012, in idea de a introduce utilizarea combustibililor ecologici care urmau sa reduca gazele cu efect de sera in statele membre ale UE, cu un plus de efort in sectorul transportului. Comisia si-a exprimat ingrijorarea cu privire la limitarea conversiei pasunilor in terenuri agricole pentru cultivarea plantelor destinate producerii biocombustibililor, sus-aminititii factori ILUC, si a decis prin prezenta propunere de revizuire sa limiteze astfel amprenta de CO2 a biocombustibililor de prima generatie in interiorul UE.
Propunerea Comisiei Europene cuprindea cateva modificari semnificative care au dovedit un impact augumentat in dezbaterile ulterioare. O prima modificare a fost limitarea utilizarii biocombustibililor conventionali la un prag de 5% cu scopul de a stimula productia celor avansati, deoarece nefiind derivati din cereale acestia nu produc cresterea preturilor la alimente si nu creeaza fenomenul competitiei mancare pentru combustibili, dar in acelasi timp contribuie si la limitarea emisiilor CO2. De asemenea, o noua modificare stipula introducerea in calculul performantei fiecarui biocombustibil a factorilor poluatori cauzati de schimbarile indirecte de utilizare a terenurilor. Comisia a subliniat ca raportarea factorilor ILUC de catre producatori devine obligatorie si ca aceasta practica contribuie la randul ei la imbunatatirea tehnologiei de productie incurajand produsele eoc-friendly.
Dezbaterile care au urmat procesului de revizuire a propunerii s-au concentrat pe factorii ILUC, cu precadere pe amprenta acestora asupra mediului si pe fenomenul competitiei mancare pentru combustibili, in special cei derivati din grau, porumb, sfecla de zahar sau trestie de zahar. Revizuirea a opus doua tabere, cea a activistilor pentru mediu si cea a industriei de profil, cei dintai argumentand ca factorii ILUC trebuie incorporati in raportarea obligatorie, in timp ce reprezentantii industriei au reclamat lipsa studiilor si a datelor stiintifice, a metodologiei cercetarii care masoara factorii poluatori cauzati de schimbarile indirecte de utilizare a terenurilor.
in luna septembrie a anului 2013, in Parlamentul European s-a sustinut votul cu privire la amendamentele aduse textului RED. De notat este faptul ca cele doua comitete, ITRE si ENVI au avut opinii diferite despre pragul initial de 5% pentru combustibilii ecologici conventionali, astfel: ITRE a propus un prag de 6,5%, in timp ce ENVI unul de 5,5%. Parlamentul European a aprobat propunerea cu modificari printr-un vot de 356 la 327, dupa cum urmeaza: un prag de 6% pentru biocombustibilii conventionali care contribuie la atingerea obiectivului de 10% regenerabile in sectorul transportului si a cerut ca pana in anul 2016 sa se stranga suficiente date pentru a intocmi metodologia necesara masurarii factorilor ILUC care urmeaza sa fie introdusi in calculul performantei fiecarui combustibil. Textul a fost directionat spre dezbatere in Consiliul European, dar nu a atins acordul politic la Consiliul pentru Energie din 12 decembrie 2013.
Incertitudine legislativa de durata
Lipsa atingerii unui consens in privinta textului propus in Consiliul pentru Energie impinge dezbaterea intr-un proces lung de incertitudine legislativa. Dosarul a fost amanat pentru anul 2014, dar ramane de vazut cum vor gestiona problema viitoarele presedintii in contextul alegerilor europarlamentare din mai, avand in vedere ca vor trebui sa negocieze cu o noua legislatura a Parlamentului European si un nou colegiu de comisari care vor prelua mandatul cel mai probabil in noiembrie 2014, entitati legislative si de decizie ale UE care ar putea introduce pe agenda negocierilor problematica biocarburantilor nu mai devreme de 2015, cauzand in continuare nemultumiri.
Nu numai ca aceasta stare de fapt se constituie intr-o piedica pentru industria producataore de biocarburanti conventionali, dar mai ales cei avansati inregistreaza o diminuare in investitii, inovare si productie din cauza lipsei unui pachet legislativ ferm. Reprezentantii industriei de profil reclama aceasta abordare a UE, care cel mai probabil va determina o scadere a valorii investitiilor si a proiectelor energetice pe termen lung. Alte efecte economice negative ar fi si cresterea ratei somajului si diminuarea numarului de locuri de munca in industria biocarburantilor si in sectorul agricol (responsabil de cultivarea cerealelor directionate producerii biocarburantilor). Avand in vedere toate acestea, Europa risca sa devina mai putin atractiva pentru posibilii investitori din industria carburantilor ecologici, prin urmare, mai putin competitiva pe piata mondiala de profil.
Grupurile de mediu si-au exprimat in mod constant preocuparea legata de asa-numitul fenomen al competitiei mancare pentru combustibili (food for fuel competition), care in cele din urma va duce la cresterea preturilor pentru alimente pe piata europeana si pe piata tarilor terte care livreaza catre UE cerealele pentru producerea biocombustibililor. Desi sunt vazuti ca o alternativa la combustibilii de prima generatie derivati din cereale, cei din a doua si a treia generatie produsi din partile ne-comestibile ale plantelor, alge si reziduuri vegetale, sunt insuficient incurajati sa se dezvolte.
Controversa propunerii de revizuire consta in pragul fixat pentru biocarburantii conventionali si in includerea factorilor poluatori cauzati de schimbarile indirecte de utilizare a terenurilor in textul RED. Factorii poluatori (ILUC) reprezinta suma emisiilor CO2 care decurg din procesul de cultivare a cerealelor si procesarea acestora in combustibili. Pe de alta parte, o alta problema apare in contextul cultivarii terenurilor cu plante utilizate pentru producerea de biocombustibili, terenuri care se afla sub presiunea de a fi intrebuintate pentru producerea de cereale destinate consumului uman. Fenomenul competitiei mancare pentru combustibili coroborat cu cresterea preturilor la alimente este o tema care aduce ingrijorare in privinta viitorului biocombustibililor. in plus, factorii poluatori cauzati de schimbarile indirecte de utilizare a terenurilor se mai refera si la predispozitia de a mari aria terenurilor cultivate, fie ca acestea sunt initial paduri sau pasuni, cu cereale destinate producerii de combusitibili bio. Studiile care se opun industriei combustibililor bio exemplifica cum emisiile care decurg din utilizarea terenurilor pentru producerea de astfel de cereale au efecte negative sociale, economice si implicatii asupra mediului, cauzand biodiversitatii si comunitatilor de mici dimensiuni.
Evolutii viitoare
in baza dificultatilor cu care se confrunta combustibilii ecologici, se poate trage concluzia ca, standarde de mediu mult prea inalte anima fortele de decizie ale UE. A se afla in avangarda politicilor de limitare a emisiilor gazelor cu efect de sera este foarte important pentru UE, dar ca acestea sa prevaleze asupra cresterii economice se face in mare masura in detrimentul statelor membre. Limitarile impuse asupra biocombustibililor conventionali vor forta probabil UE sa isi regandeasca strategia de eficienta energetica. Acest lucru ar putea insemna extinderea productiei de masini electrice si de combustibili ecologici derivati din produse non-alimentare. Incertitudinile legislative si controversa legata de factorii ILUC, au tendinta de a discredita industria biocombustibililor din UE. Cu toate acestea, biocombustibilii conventionali fac parte cu succes din mixul energetic utilizat in sectorul transportului.
Legislatia carburantilor produsi din surse regenerabile pare sa nu aiba o directie clar definita si ramane de vazut cum Grecia sau Italia, tari care detin presedintia UE in anul 2014 vor aborda aceasta tema politica de interes major pentru grupurile de lobby si actorii industriali. Este de inteles faptul ca atat cresterea economica, cat si limitarea CO2, sunt dependente de un suport legislativ ferm, dar si de masuri politice responsabile.
*biocarburanti conventionali sau biocarburanti de prima generatie, sunt obtinuti din cereale, porumb, grau, din sfecla si trestie de zahar, din seminte precum soia si rapita;
**biocarburantii avansati sau de a doua si a treia generatie, sunt obtinuti din deseuri si reziduuri, alge, folosind o tehnologie de procesare avansata, rezultatul fiind combustibilii cu o amprenta scazuta de CO2; nu provin din culturi care produc cereale;
A long, controversial path is foreseen for the bio-fuels legislation in the EU following the lack of political agreement at the Energy Council on December 12th over the proposal related to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels amending the Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources. The bio-fuels’ uncertain future is spread with extensive opposition from both environmental groups and renewable fuels industry stakeholders. Further action and a firm legislative package that will not encumber the economic growth, but encourage the transition to advanced bio-fuels and support the achievement of EU’s energy objectives are long awaited.
2014 is a rather complicated year both for the bio-fuels legislation and bio-fuels industry stakeholders. That is partly, because of the European Parliament’s elections which represent a political stake for the EU, therefore little time is spared for economic topics. On the other hand, the current European Commission’s political echelon will have to leave space for a complete new set of commissioners and a new president this year. In other words, a final deal on the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) seems unlikely to be achieved before mid 2015.
In the analysis of bio-fuels, two levels of political action are to be counted: (1) the decision-making bodies of the EU, and (2) the lobby groups.
(1) the decision-making bodies of the EU consist of: i. the executive Member States’ delegations to the Council of the European Union, those who have a mandate to reach a political agreement on the topic; ii. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), in the particular case those form the well-established committees: ITRE Committee (industry, technology, research and energy) and ENVI Committee (environment and public health), who proceed to the legislative vote in the Parliament’s forum; iii. The European Commission, the one which set the 10% share of renewables in transport by 2020 as a target encompassed in the environmental strategy of the EU;
(2) the lobby groups: i. environmental lobby groups that resort to media campaigns to persuade the public opinion on the negative footprint of the first generation bio-fuels*; they seem to enjoy public support across EU at a large extent, and have great success gaining political support in the EP most of the times for policies that are purely true ecological fantasies designed to unbalance the European economic competitiveness compared to other international actors (the European Green Party in the EP with its 48 MEPs usually supported in their political endeavours by the socialists from PES and sometimes ALDE; also the ENVI Committee Rapporteur on bio-fuels and ILUC factors is the vocal MEP Corinne Lepage, ALDE group); ii. the industry lobby groups, usually concerned about investments in research and technological innovation, trying to cope with the bad name of great polluters, enjoying political support in ITRE Committee;
The environmental lobby groups oppose the industry for different aspects. First, the environmental lobby groups are those which support the most advanced targets in GHG savings, and displayed over the past years considerable disapproval towards the EU bio-fuels policies, claiming lack of convergence and commitment on environmental targets. The environmental lobby is an intricate web of smaller and larger agencies, offices, organisations, non-governmental organisations, usually Brussels-based, that benefit of large funds and finance that enable them to make their voice heard. On the other hand, there is the bio-fuels industry and its related stakeholders, interested to enhance profits by gaining support of bio-fuels on the European market, highlighting that advanced bio-fuels** are too expensive to be produced at present, and that an unrealistic shift in lowering the cap for conventional ones, would visibly harm the European economy, already afflicted by crisis. The former groups are trying to undermine the production of conventional bio-fuels therefore they are the supporters of a down-seized cap on crop-derived bio-fuels, whereas the latter groups argue they are not ready to produce advanced bio-fuels, there is not a clear legislative framework for eco fuels, and claim to lose all their already made investments over the past 4 years.
Recent political evolutions
On December 12th at the Energy Council’s meeting, the Lithuanian Presidency presented the compromise position on the proposal amending RED. In terms of the forthcoming evolutions on the subject, Member States’ disapproval is highly discouraging. The key recommendations of the text read a 7% cap for the crop-based bio-fuels to be achieved in the transport sector by 2020, while suggesting the reporting on a regular basis of ILUC factors in RED. Additionally, it set a discretionary sub-target for advanced bio-fuels based on unconventional feed-stocks.
During the press conference that followed the meeting, the Lithuanian Minister of Energy, Jaroslav Neverovič, evaluated the discussions as productive and with good results. Neverovič highlighted that the Presidency had a constructive and solid text on the table although failing to meet the long-awaited political agreement due to the opposition of several Member States which did not overcome their reservations.
It is important to point out that during the fastidious negotiations all through the Irish Presidency in the first semester of 2013, Member States expressed considerable concerns over the cap set for the conventional crop-based bio-fuels, a general term for gasoline and diesel substitutes derived from plant matter. One may argue that an increase from the initial 5% cap in RED to the 7% cap in the compromise text undermines the efforts to limit the environmental footprint of bio-fuels, whilst by setting a discretionary sub-target for advanced bio-fuels, Member States are encouraged to enhance second and third generation renewable fuels in order to meet the 10% transport target.
A 4-year controversial road for bio-fuels in the EU
Hardly had little time elapsed from the adoption of RED in 2009 when the European Commission announced the revision of the Directive in October 2012 in the light of setting targets for renewable fuels use and GHG reduction in all Member States across the EU, with a special effort to be made in the transport sector. The Commission expressed concern on the limitation of global land conversion for bio-fuels production, the so-called ILUC factors, and decided to limit the environmental footprint of the first generation renewable fuels usage inside the EU.
The Commission’s proposal read few but significant changes which proved to have substantial consequences for the forthcoming debates. One of those changes was the limited use of conventional bio-fuels to a 5% cap in order to stimulate the production of advanced bio-fuels made form non-food feedstock, which do not affect food prices since it does not create competition over crops and limit the GHG emissions. Another change emphasised that ILUC factors should be considered when calculating bio-fuels’ performance. The Commission stated that mandatory reporting of the ILUC factors on behalf of fuel producers stipulated in the proposal’s text will make the renewable fuels industry to improve its production technology and service delivery of its best environmental friendly bio-fuels.
The debates that followed the proposal’s revision focused on the ILUC factors, mainly on their environmental footprint and the competition food for fuel, especially for fuels derived from crops like wheat, corn, sugar beets or sugar cane. The measure opposed the environmentalists and the renewable fuels industry stakeholders, the former arguing that ILUC factors should be encompassed within the mandatory accounting, while the latter arguing over the lack of reliable scientific data and research methodology to accurately assess the ILUC factors.
Later on in September 2013, the European Parliament held a vote on the proposed amendments to Renewable Energy Directive. Note that the EP ITRE and ENVI committees had different opinions on the initial 5% cap for food-based bio-fuels: ITRE proposed a 6.5%, while ENVI a 5.5% cap. The EP approved by a vote of 356 to 327 the proposal with changes as follows: a 6% cap for food-derived fuels that could contribute to the 10% transport target, required by 2016 data collection and methodology concerning ILUC factors that are to be accounted. The text was sent to the European Council to be debated until finally reached no political agreement on December 12th at the Energy Council.
Ongoing regulatory uncertainty
Failing to reach the political agreement on the proposal discussed at the Energy Council pushes the debate in a lengthy process of regulatory uncertainty. Since the dossier is postponed for this year, it remains to be seen how the coming Presidencies will handle the issue in the context of 2014 European Parliament’s elections, bearing in mind that a new legislature and a new college of commissioners foreseen to take office in November 2014 may show little interest to place the issue on the agenda before 2015, therefore causing further dissatisfaction.
Not only is the present state of affairs a hindrance for the first generation bio-fuels industry, but also do the advanced ones experience a slowdown in production due to the lack of a strong legislative back-up in their support. Stakeholders of the renewable fuels industry protest against this approach that will most likely lead to a decrease of the investment rate and long term energy projects. Unemployment and job losses in the related industry and in the agricultural sector, with special regard to jobs in rural areas, could be counted as the few economic negative effects. Considering all that, Europe risks to become less attractive for prospective investors willing to produce bio-fuels, hence less competitive on the bio-fuels markets around the world.
Environmental groups have constantly expressed their preoccupation with the so-called food for fuel competition that would eventually negatively affect the food prices. Though seen as an alternative to the first generation of bio-fuels which are crop-based, second and third generations of bio-fuels produced of non-edible parts of the plants, algae or waste, are insufficiently encouraged to develop.
The controversy of the proposal lies in the cap set for the conventional bio-fuels and in the accounting versus reporting of ILUC factors in RED. ILUC factors – indirect land use change – represent the sum of GHG emissions from cultivation, processing and transportation of bio-fuels. Another problem arises when cultivating the existing agricultural land for crops that are going to be used in bio-fuels’ production, it may develop the necessity for those crops to be used for food or feed. Competition food for fuel and the rise in food prices is one of the major causes of concern in relation to bio-fuels. Furthermore, indirect land use change refers to the possibility of transforming natural land, grassland or even forests into agricultural land, used for crop cultivation from which bio-fuels are to be produced in order to maintain the demand and supply balance. Studies opposing to crop-derived bio-fuels industry exemplify how ILUC factors have social, economic and environmental implications, affecting biodiversity or small communities.
Future perspectives
Based on the difficulties the renewable fuels confront with, one can draw the conclusion that too higher environmental standards animate the decision-making echelon of the EU. Being in the avant-garde of GHG emissions limitation is of uttermost importance for the EU, but prevailing upon economic growth is in the Member States’ detriment. Limitations in the use of conventional bio-fuels will in all likelihood force the EU to rethink its energy efficiency strategy. This could mean the expansion of electric cars and non-food bio-fuels that do not yet fulfil the commercial demands in terms of market availability. The regulatory uncertainty and the controversy among ILUC factors have the tendency to discredit the EU bio-fuels industry. However, the crop-based fuels are part of the energy mix successfully used in transport sector.
Renewable fuels legislation seems to lack direction and it remains to be seen how the Greek Presidency or the Italian one will approach this topic of keen interest for everyone. We must acknowledge though, that both economic growth and GHG emissions limitation are contingent upon legislative support and responsible political measures.
*conventional bio-fuels or first generation bio-fuels are made of corn, sugar cane and beet, wheat or oilseed crops such as soy and rape;
**advanced bio-fuels or second and third generation bio-fuels are manufactured from more sustainable feedstocks using advanced processing technology resulting in more efficient utilisation of the feedstock and lower CO2 emissions; are made of non-food crops;