12/01/2012 (New Strait Times) - Producers, Including Oil Palm Growers, Question The Calculation of Sustainability, write Dr Gernot Pehnelt and Christoph Vietze.

An Applied Agricultural Resources tissue lab employee with results of research into the amount of
oil obtained from an oil palm fruit. Uncertainty about what the EU considers sustainable is affecting
investment in the biofuel sector

On Dec 5,  2010, the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) came into force in the European Union (EU).

Member states are still working to fully transpose the directive into national law and establish a framework for achieving their legally- binding greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reductions.

However, governments got off to a slow start as debate continues on the validity of the directives' foundations, including the default values used to measure the sustainability of biofuels.

Only sustainable biofuels  count  towards member state's targets. This makes sense with respect to the very aim of renewable energy policies.

On the other hand, the vague and distortive formulation and values regarding what is to be classified as "sustainable" have negatively impacted the perception of the underlying scientific base and methodologies as well as the reliability in the European biofuels sector.

This uncertainty and the  controversial debates are affecting investment and progress in the biofuel sector, not just in Europe,  but all over the world.

Producers of soybeans in the United States, sugarcane in Brazil and palm oil in Malaysia and Indonesia as well as European importers and end-users of these products have all been  critical of the default values, citing significant variations in calculations that undermine the credibility of the values contained in the directive.

There is a remarkable difference between the calculation of carbon reduction performance of palm oil- based biofuel by the EU and a range of scientific studies that  we documented in 2009.

At the Friedrich Schiller University of Jena, Germany, we have  re-calculated realistic and transparent scenario-based CO2-emission values for the GHG emission savings of palm oil fuel compared with fossil fuel.

Using the calculation scheme proposed by Red, we derive a more realistic overall default value for palm oil diesel by using current input and output data of biofuel production (for example, in Southeast Asia) and documenting every single step in detail.

Our conservative calculations based on the Joint Research Centre's 2011 background data and current publications on palm oil production result in GHG emissions saving potentials of palm oil-based biodiesel fairly above the 35 per cent threshold.

Our results indicate default values for the GHG emission savings potential of palm oil biodiesel not only way beyond the 19 per cent default value published in the directive but also beyond the 35 per cent threshold.

The more accurate default value for palm oil feedstock for electricity generation should be 52 per cent, and for transportation biodiesel between 38.5 per cent and 45 per cent, depending on the fossil fuel comparator.

As indicated by lawsuits filed by environmental non-governmental organisations against the commission for greater transparency related to the assessment of biofuels, the process has been  lacking in full disclosure of metrics used to achieve the values contained in  the directive.

As a result, the reliability of the directive to support the EU's low-carbon ambitions is being undermined, exposing the EU and commission to charges of trade discrimination and limiting the ability of member states to achieve their legally-binding GHG emission reductions.

A full review of the values contained in the directive should be undertaken and the values revised to ensure their accuracy.

Were outside parties consulted, including the industries directly affected by the assessments in the directive? Were these values peer-reviewed?

In light of grievances expressed by producers throughout the world, including US soybean growers, Brazilian sugarcane farmers, and Malaysian and Indonesian palm growers, ensuring the directive does not discriminate against imports is critical to the long-term efforts in the EU to reduce GHG emissions.

These findings and concerns surrounding the trade implications of the directive give cause for serious concern within the EU community regarding the viability of the system to  deliver the GHG emissions savings that are required in the legislation.

While limiting imports of inefficient and environmentally damaging biofuel sources should be supported, distorting technical parameters in legislation to limit entry into the European market would be costly for consumers and businesses while exposing the EU to  trade disputes and  retaliation.

The EU has been a leader in the promotion of low-carbon solutions to energy needs and the development of technologies that will spur a new age of energy generation and transportation.

Unfortunately, since the EU began to pursue this goal, the debate has increasingly turned to how these efforts can be increasingly limited, through introduction of new, untested sustainability criteria. Not only will these measures undermine confidence in Europe's low-carbon ambitions, however, they will also harm the global cooperation that is key to achieving these goals.