"The government and the biodiesel industry are at odds over the impact of the soy-based fuel's failure to meet standards for reducing greenhouse gas emissions," reports Philip Brasher of The Des Moines Register. The biodiesel industry fears that combining fuel sources, as EPA wants, could be impractical.
Brasher writes, "Producers would have to make biodiesel from waste restaurant grease and animal fats as well as soybean oil, a far more abundant feedstock but one that doesn't score well on the agency's climate-impact test, said Margo Oge, an EPA official who testified before the House Agriculture Committee on Wednesday."
Manning Feraci, vice president of federal affairs for the National Biodiesel Board, said some producers may lack access to alternate feedstocks, and could have distribution problems because biodiesel made from animal fat doesn't perform as well in the winter as that made from soybeans. But EPA says biodiesel should have 40 percent to 50 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions of conventional diesel fuel. "The theory is that diverting soybeans or corn to produce fuel will lead to forests being cut down or peat bogs being drained elsewhere to grow crops," Brasher explains. "Biodiesel made from fats or grease easily meets the emissions target because there are no land-use impacts from those feedstocks." (Read more)
Dan Looker of Agriculture Online and Successful Farming writes, "EPA appears to be counting increased soybean acreage devoted to biodiesel production as an incentive to clear rain forest and grasslands to grow soybeans in Brazil, even though Brazilian soybean production decreased from 2004 to 2008 while the U.S. biodiesel industry was ramping up from 25 million gallons to 690 million." Looker's story offers good details on soybean farmers' point of view.
No comments:
Post a Comment