Ethanol Industry Refutes Global Rebound Theory
First it was the unprovable Indirect Land Use Change (ILUC) theory. Now ethanol is being challenged by a new “what goes around comes around” hypothesis called the “Global Rebound Effect.”
Earlier this week, the Clean Air Task Force filed suit against the Environmental Protection Agency over the Renewable Fuel Standard for failing “to account for the “global rebound effect” when analyzing the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels.”
This theory goes on the assumption that, “By displacing some gasoline from the US market, the RFS reduces overall demand for petroleum, which in turn leads to lower prices, increased consumption, and higher greenhouse gas emissions in other countries. If EPA had considered the “global rebound effect” in its analysis of different biofuels, only a few of those fuels would have met Congress’s emissions reduction requirements.”
Using this theory, ANY action the United States might take to reduce gasoline consumption – from using more ethanol to increasing vehicle fuel efficiency – will result in INCREASED gasoline use elsewhere in the world. As Renewable Fuels Association president Bob Dinneen puts it, “Whatever environmentalist activists call this new theory, I call it nonsense.”
RFA is is challenging the lawsuit and the whole concept of Global Rebound Effect. “To penalize a technology, any technology, that reduces American oil consumption for any potential oil use in other nations is asinine,” said Dinneen. “Environmentalists are in favor of precious little these days, but by applying their new logic even efforts to improve efficiencies such as gas mileage must suffer a carbon penalty. It simply defies logic.”
That is indeed what the theory says, according to Steven Stoft, founder of the Global Economic Policy Center. In something he wrote last year called, “Corn Whiskey vs. the Climate,” Stoft said, “More ethanol use causes less oil to be imported, which causes a lower world “oil” price, which causes more liquid-fuel use worldwide. This same effect applies to conserving oil as well as to replacing it with ethanol, or even to pumping more oil from Alaska.”
RFA is also challenging the lawsuit claims that EPA is using overly optimistic assumptions about the nature of ethanol production in 2022, implicitly implying little improvement will occur in ethanol production technology between now and then. “To assume that no further innovation will occur in America’s ethanol industry is akin to believing the iPad is the final product from Apple,” said Dinneen.
The case, and RFA’s challenge to it, has been filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
15 Comments »
BIOblogger
The sad irony is that environmentalists are the greatest agents for status quo global climate change, fossil fuels, dependence on oligarchic oil companies, and tyrannical oil cartels. They may reject this characterization, but really, what’s the difference?
It is time they stood up for “good” positive efforts by people involved in developing renewable fuels and power industries. Nothing is “perfect” – but neither is the status quo.
Martin Tjossem
Just think how the “Big Wheels” sitting in the background, pulling their puppet’s strings are laughing. Big oil wants it all, always has, always will. John D Rockefeller’s legacy lives on.
Jan van Beilen
Like websites funded by the oil industry, this website doesn’t seem to accept any argument that might harm biofuels. ILUC is plausible to say the least, even if it were really unproven.
Rebound is a well-known effect, like Jevon’s paradox. Of course the biofuels industry doesn’t like rebound, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
This website speaks with the tongue of typical denialists: if it can’t be proven with 100% certainty (which is never the case in natural science) there’s no reason to act.
Larry Farmer
Sure this website is biased, that’s the point. I do agreed that, without intervention, rebound will occur, so it *is* worthwhile pointing out that fact. Mankind has a long and glorious history of unintended consequences. But we can not let that hold us back. We need to push forward, monitoring the response to our actions and adjusting to minimize the negative impacts, aka, we need a feedback loop.
We live in a world of many shades of gray. We need to stop behaving as if the world is black and white.
Biofuels Digest gives “Where Have You Gone, Andy Rooney?” Award to Clean Air Task Force for “Global Rebound Effect” theorem : Biofuels Digest - biofuels, biodiesel, ethanol, algae, jatropha, green gasoline, green diesel, and biocru
[...] More on the story. var a2a_config = a2a_config || {}; a2a_config.linkname="Biofuels Digest gives “Where Have You Gone, Andy Rooney?” Award to Clean Air Task Force for “Global Rebound Effect” theorem"; a2a_config.linkurl="http://biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2010/06/02/biofuels-digest-gives-where-have-you-gone-andy-rooney-award-to-clean-air-task-force-for-global-rebound-effect-theorem/"; [...]
Jan van Beilen
Sure the world is gray (blackish in some parts I would say), but biofuels are not nearly as white as its promoters pretend. To make rebound go away, opening of a biofuels facility should be linked to closing an equivalent oilfield, which is highly unlikely in any country.
ILUC may be limited if biofuels production is strictly limited to badly degraded land (hardly any biomass) or new irrigated land (but where’s the water). This doesn’t include any of the currently produced biofuels.
And then there is this other problem: food price increases: production of subsidized biofuels lowers the fuel price, because supply increases (simple market forces), and increases food prices as food crops are diverted to fuel. Who profits? The affluent car drivers. Who suffers? The poor for whom the food price is a big part of their expenses. So, the subsidies and mandates for biofuels production result in a transfer of money from poor to rich (Robin Hood in reverse).
Now, sell that to the voters! But, wait a minute, they already did. Actually, biofuels are just as black as oil.
Cindy Zimmerman
The problem with both ILUC and GRE is that they can apply to ANY thing. Like the Butterfly effect, everything we do has some effect on something somewhere else. Therefore, if we can’t assume that each and every action we take won’t cause an adverse effect elsewhere, then we can’t do ANY thing.
Jan van Beilen
Re Cindy Zimmerman
Now that’s a true word. ILUC and rebound DO apply to any thing. The only way to prevent rebound is to close a coal mine or oil field the moment a new renewables facility is opened. If energy from the new renewables are simply added, it just increases total energy use, without really replacing fossil fuels.
So, your answer should not be: rebound and ILUC are unproven theories (there’s far too much speaking for them); the answer should be: how can we stop fossil fuels from being produced (to eliminate rebound), and how can limit the side-effects of biofuels.
Rod McPhee
Some people have never met a theory that they didn’t like. After spending 35 years as an environmental professional I have seen environmentalism go from a creditable and mostly scientifically pragmatic profession to one dominated by thinking that can only be characterized as “intellectual masterbation”. ILUC and GRE are just theories that at worst would be short-term anomalies in a transition from “mostly fossil fuels” to “mostly alternative fuels” energy infrastructure. Ethanol represents the best alternative to lessening our dependence on the “terrorist infested” oil industry in the Middle East. The next best thing is natural gas. Last and the furthest in the future would be the “green” technologies that for the next 30 – 50 years can’t give us much help. The fastest way to “green” is through ethanol and natural gas, not in trying to supplant them with technologies that are not ready for prime time.
Ethanol Issues at Corn Utilization Conference - Domestic Fuel
[...] group lawsuit over the Renewable Fuel Standard that claims EPA did not account for the “Global Rebound Effect.” “In essence, what the theory suggests is that by using more biofuels in the United States, [...]
Ethanol Issues at Corn Utilization Conference | Alternative Fuel | Alternative Fuel Audio, Video & Alarms Automotive Parts Car Loans Car Restoration
[...] group lawsuit over the Renewable Fuel Standard that claims EPA did not account for the “Global Rebound Effect.” “In essence, what the theory suggests is that by using more biofuels in the United States, [...]
Ethanol Issues at Corn Utilization Conference
[...] group lawsuit over the Renewable Fuel Standard that claims EPA did not account for the “Global Rebound Effect.” “In essence, what the theory suggests is that by using more biofuels in the United States, [...]
Ethanol Industry Takes Environmental Group to Task - Domestic Fuel
[...] This attack is just one of several that various environmental groups have launched against the industry. [...]
Ethanol Industry Takes Environmental Group to Task | Alternative Fuel | Alternative Fuel Audio, Video & Alarms Automotive Parts Car Loans Car Restoration
[...] This attack is just one of several that various environmental groups have launched against the industry. [...]
Ethanol Industry Takes Environmental Group to Task
[...] This attack is just one of several that various environmental groups have launched against the industry. [...]
Comments RSS feed — TrackBack URI
Leave a Comment