Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that the EPA can avoid the 'blend wall'—the limit of ethanol that can be readily added to gasoline—by making corresponding reductions to advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel volume requirements when cellulosic biofuel production falls short. It warns that allowing other advanced biofuels to backfill the cellulosic void would increase ethanol use by 40% by 2021, strain global agricultural markets, and increase GHG emissions. The author suggests that if the EPA does not act, Congress should amend the Clean Air Act to mandate these reductions.

The document provides a comprehensive overview of energy subsidies in Thailand, detailing the mechanisms used to subsidize LPG, NGV, diesel, electricity, and biofuels. It argues that while these subsidies aim to ensure affordability, they often disproportionately benefit higher-income groups, encourage wasteful consumption, and create fiscal strain on the government and state-owned enterprises. The guide outlines the negative impacts of these subsidies, such as fuel smuggling and environmental degradation, and suggests reform strategies based on international experience, emphasizing the need for market-based pricing and targeted social assistance.

The proceedings detail a national seminar in Malawi focused on shifting from traditional biomass (firewood and charcoal) to modern bioenergy (bioethanol and biodiesel). Key discussions include the potential of Jatropha as a boundary crop to avoid food-fuel competition, the efficiency of improved cookstoves like the rocket stove, and the socio-economic benefits of sugarcane outgrower schemes. The document emphasizes the need for a coherent national policy to reduce reliance on imported fossil fuels and mitigate deforestation.

The study evaluates the greenhouse gas emissions of various biodiesel and bio-ethanol feedstocks compared to fossil fuels. It finds that waste cooking oil and sugarbeet offer the highest emissions savings, but the current feedstock mix would require a 23.8% market share by 2020 to meet the LCTP's 6% emissions saving goal.

The study assesses four scenarios for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Tallinn's bus fleet by 2020, finding that while biodiesel and bioethanol offer the highest emission reductions, they are significantly more expensive per ton of CO2e reduced than other transport or energy sector measures.

Biodiesel is a renewable fuel derived from vegetable oils or animal fats that can be blended with or replace conventional diesel. While biodiesel produced from waste materials can reduce global warming pollution by 80 to 90 percent, production from unused edible oils can drive deforestation, particularly through the expansion of palm oil in Southeast Asia. The document notes that policy-driven demand often exceeds the supply of low-carbon sources, risking the use of 'dirty sources' that undermine the fuel's environmental benefits. It distinguishes biodiesel from 'renewable diesel' and 'bio-jet' fuels, which are processed with hydrogen to create 'drop-in fuels' that are nearly indistinguishable from conventional petroleum fuels.

The report analyzes the social, environmental, and business performance of 1,337 SMMEs in developing countries, with a focus on the 2011 applicant cohort. It identifies a strong trend toward the adoption of new technologies and a shift in organizational identity from strictly non-profit to hybrid or for-profit models. Key barriers include a lack of financial resources, limited access to technical research partners, and a deficiency in local-level environmental monitoring and enforcement. The study also highlights gender disparities, noting that women-led enterprises often face greater challenges in accessing business management skills and markets.

The document examines the 'food versus fuel' debate, specifically analyzing how consumption mandates like the US Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) and the EU Renewable Energy Directive (RED) impact food prices. It notes that while intergovernmental organizations disagree on the exact percentage of price increases attributable to biofuels (ranging from 5% to 75%), there is a consensus that they play a role. The brief argues that the rigidity of these mandates and the rapid increase in production exacerbate price volatility. It recommends reducing the rigidity of consumption targets and implementing robust reporting requirements on the use of food crops as feedstocks.

The document examines the economic implications of increasing the United Kingdom's biofuel blending mandate from 4-5 per cent to 10-15 per cent to comply with the EU's Renewable Energy Directive. It investigates various cost drivers, including government administration of the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation, agricultural subsidies under the CAPs Single Payment Scheme, potential tax revenue losses from biofuel exemptions, and increased consumer prices and engine damage.

The report analyzes how the rising demand for vegetable oils, particularly palm and soy, has led to significant tropical deforestation and carbon emissions. It argues that deforestation is not inevitable and suggests alternatives such as increasing crop yields, expanding onto degraded non-forest lands, and substituting high-risk oils with deforestation-free alternatives. The document also evaluates the role of biofuel mandates, sustainability certifications like the RSPO, and corporate commitments in mitigating environmental damage.

The report assesses four fleet scenarios for the Tallinn Bus Company (TAK) up to 2020: continuing with conventional diesel, or transitioning to bioethanol (ED95), biodiesel (B100), or diesel-electric hybrids. While alternative fuels significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions and external costs, they are more expensive to operate than conventional diesel. The study finds that the most cost-effective way to reduce local air pollution (PM and NOx) is simply replacing old buses with new Euro V and VI diesel models, as the emission gap between new diesel and alternative technologies has narrowed. Biodiesel offers the highest CO2 reduction potential, while hybrids provide the best fuel economy. The report recommends a diversified technology approach to mitigate risks associated with fuel prices and supply.

The analysis finds that bioenergy projects relying on on-farm residues claim the highest number of sustainable development benefits, while those using industrial forestry residues claim the fewest. Most projects focus on economic and environmental benefits, with very few social benefits beyond stakeholder participation.

The provided text is a publication list for a project titled 'Landuse change, biofuels and rural development in the La Plata Basin'. It enumerates various academic papers, theses, and reports published between 2006 and 2011. The listed works focus on ecohydrology, satellite monitoring of land use, the environmental and social impacts of biofuels in South America, and the ecological footprint of agricultural expansion, particularly in Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay.

The document outlines job estimates for various green energy sectors in the U.S., distinguishing between direct, indirect, and induced employment. It provides specific figures for wind, solar, hydropower, geothermal, and biomass industries, while noting the difficulty in quantifying energy efficiency jobs due to their integration into larger industries.

The document details job estimates for various energy efficiency and renewable energy sectors in the U.S., citing data from government agencies and industry associations. It distinguishes between direct, indirect, and induced jobs, noting that energy efficiency employment is often embedded in larger industries. Specific figures are provided for wind, solar, hydropower, geothermal, and biomass sectors, with total renewable energy job estimates ranging from 853,370 to 953,370.

The report assesses the Swedish biofuels innovation system from 1990 to 2010, finding that while it functioned well overall—increasing the market share of first-generation biofuels—it remained heavily dependent on public governance. The analysis highlights a strategic imbalance where over-attention to market formation for first-generation fuels (ethanol and biodiesel) may have hindered the research and development of more sustainable second-generation alternatives. External factors, including oil price fluctuations and evolving climate debates, significantly moderated the effectiveness of governance policies.

The report challenges the 'miracle crop' narrative of jatropha, presenting ten reasons why industrial-scale plantations fail. It argues that jatropha requires fertile land, significant water, and chemical inputs to be productive, contradicting claims that it thrives on marginal land. This leads to competition with food production, displacement of local communities, and biodiversity loss. Economically, the report highlights a pattern of failed investment projects and unrealistic yield promises. Environmentally, it asserts that land-use change for jatropha can increase carbon emissions, undermining its purpose as a climate solution.

The report examines the jatropha biofuel industry in Mozambique, challenging the 'myths' that the crop grows well on marginal lands, requires minimal water, and is pest-resistant. It finds that both small-scale and industrial plantations typically occupy fertile arable land and often fail to meet promised yields. The document highlights risks to food security, as subsistence farmers replace food crops with jatropha, and reports widespread land grabbing facilitated by government corruption and the manipulation of the 1997 Land Law. It concludes that jatropha is not a viable development tool for Mozambique and recommends halting its support until food sovereignty is guaranteed.

The report challenges the narrative that jatropha is a 'miracle crop' for Mozambique, finding that it requires fertile land and significant water, is vulnerable to pests that can spread to food crops, and often leads to land grabbing and economic instability for subsistence farmers.

The report investigates the reality of jatropha production in Mozambique, challenging the narrative that it is a sustainable 'miracle crop' for marginal lands. Through case studies and interviews, it finds that jatropha is typically grown on fertile land, displacing food crops and endangering food security for the 87% of Mozambicans who are subsistence farmers. The document highlights significant failures in industrial projects, including low yields, high pest vulnerability, and broken promises of community development. It also criticizes the Mozambican government for manipulating land laws to favor foreign investors, leading to land grabs and the marginalization of local communities.