How will the United States calculate the climate impact of bioenergy?

1. How will the United States calculate the climate impact of bioenergy? Dennis Becker Associate Professor University of Minnesota

2. Do Americans believe in climate change? Is there solid evidence the earth is warming? Yes, solid evidence the earth is warming 62% Norwegian forest owners (May 2013) Warming mostly because of human activity 20062007200820092010201120122013 PEW RESEARCH CENTER, March 13-17, 2013

3. Will Americans do anything about it? What kind of priority do you think Obama and the Congress should give … (percent saying highest priority) the economy reducing federal spending restructuring the federal tax system enacting stricter gun-control laws slowing rate of growth in spending on Medicare and Social Security addressing gun violence addressing immigration issues addressing global warming/ climate change Washington Post-ABC News poll conducted Jan 10-13, 2013 among random national sample of 1,001 adults

4. Will Americans do anything about it? Should the federal government regulate the release of GHGs from power plants, cars and factories to reduce global warming? All adults Democrat Republican Independent 8% Somewhat 13% Strongly The Washington Post - Kaiser Family Foundation poll, July 25 – August 5, 2012

5. Will Americans do anything about it? FIRST NATION THE MIDLANDS NEW FRANCE THE LEFT COAST THE FAR WEST YANKEEDOM YANKEEDOM NEW NETHERLAND THE MIDLANDS TIDEWATER GREATER APPALACHIA DEEP SOUTH EL NORTE NEW FRANCE PART OF THE SPANISH CARIBBEAN Woodard, C. 2011. American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America

6. Clean Air Act – requires EPA to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants from stationary and mobile sources; – “best available control technology” (BACT) provisions; – does NOT accommodate temporal aspects of sequestration US Supreme Court orders EPA to regulate GHGs (“endangerment”) “Tailoring Rule” adopted – allows exemption of facilities by tonnage of C emitted, not source (e.g., biomass, fossil fuels) 3-year deferral – delayed permitting of biogenic C to conduct examination – establish Accounting Framework, and Science Advisory Board Science Advisory Board – recommendations for biogenic C accounting Deferral vacated by a federal court decision New Source Performance Standards – regulations for new coal and gas-fired electricity; rules for existing facilities by 2014; biomass exempted Revised Tailoring Rule – how will EPA accommodate temporal aspects without Congressional action (new Act vs. de-authorizing EPA)?? 1970 2007 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Biogenic Carbon Policy Timeline

7. Science Advisory Board Observations • Task … restricted to biogenic carbon from stationary facilities; did not assess attributional impacts • Carbon neutrality … cannot be assumed a priori • IPCC reporting convention … does not link stationary sources to their emissions; net carbon stock approach • EPA Biogenic Accounting Framework • does not consider impacts over different time scales • net carbon stock approach (regional reference points) would exempt facilities by location, not by emissions • holding facilities responsible for carbon leakage (e.g., LUC) does not reduce overall emissions

8. Recommendations to EPA • Default equations … by feedstock category, region, prior land use, current management practices • Applied at facility-level • Facilities can demonstrate lower emissions • Anticipated baseline … compare emissions from increased harvesting against baseline • Include soil sequestration and natural decay rates • Consider alternate fates of residues/diverted wastes • Various time scales … incorporate tradeoffs of different time scales (C-plus) • Supplementary policies … to reduce carbon leakage based on assessment of directionality if not magnitude

9. Current Debate • Temporal issues difficult to rectify – radiative forcing, albedo, etc • Incorporating periodic loss events – fire, insects, and disease • Transparency – clear and consistent reference conditions • EPA struggling to connect biogenic emissions to a defensible Clean Air Act regulation – although biomass qualifies as “BACT” • Facility-level LCA calculations would slow progress; lack consistent system boundaries and data

10. Other Important Developments: “Surrogate” Climate Policy – Federal • Renewable Fuels Standard – 16 billion gal cellulosic biofuels by 2022 • Production & Investment Tax Credits – open-looped: 1.1¢/kWh; closed-looped: 2.2¢/kWh • Farm Bill (Energy Title) – community biomass heating; biomass procurement and sourcing • Vehicle fuel standards – new vehicle emissions down 19% since 2007 • BTU Act (proposed) – thermal tax parity; efficiency • Clean Energy Standard (proposed) Feedstock source Form of energy Fossil fuel displaced Forest management

11. Other Important Developments: “Surrogate” Climate Policy – States • 370+ state bioenergy policies and programs – mostly tax incentives targeting production • Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) – 36 states • Net metering – energy buy-back in 47 states • AB32 California – cap on GHGs; LULUC limits • Massachusetts RPS – links RECs to combustion efficiency; LULUC limits • Biomass harvest guidelines (site-level) – 15 states • Forest certification – 50+ million hectares third-party certified (PEFC endorsed) Feedstock source Form of energy Fossil fuel displaced Forest management

12. For more information contact: Dennis R. Becker Associate Professor Department of Forest Resources University of Minnesota drbecker@umn.edu 612.624.7286 Faculty Website: http://www.forestry.umn.edu/People/Becker/index.htm Policy Related Research: http://enrpolicy.forestry.umn.edu/Research/BiomassBioenergyClimate/index.htm