WASHINTON -- We are urging each sentor to vote "yes" on Sen. Tom Harkin's amendment to HR2996, the fiscal year 2010 Interior-Environment Appropriations bill.
Harkin's amendment would prohibit the use of fiscal year 2010 funds by the EPA to include international indirect land use change emissions in the implementation of the Renewable Fuel Standard program. We strongly endorse Harkin's effort to call a time out in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's plans to impose onerous regulations on the U.S. biofuels industry and the American farmers who grow the feedstocks used to produce the fuel.
The inclusion of international indirect land use change would undermine Congress' intention in expanding the RFS in the Energy and Independence Act of 2007. The tremendous uncertainty and inherent lack of transparency associated with the analysis of international indirect land use change makes it extremely difficult for regulators to legitimately use these results to assign penalties for international indirect effects to the carbon score of various biofuels.
Moreover, indirect land use change sets a dangerous precedent within our overall domestic economic policy. What is to prevent indirect land use change from applying to shopping malls, roads, residential homes schools and hospitals if it is arbitrarily allowed here? The indirect land use change provision was not debated before it was included in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. A one-year delay would give Congress and the Obama administration the more time to thoroughly evaluate the theory of indirect land use change.
More study
ADVERTISEMENT
It is not a good idea for EPA to regulate an industry before they have all of the necessary data. The House already has spoken on this issue and taken the right approach by including a provision in the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, which prevents the EPA from implementing this indirect land use change rule for six years until the National Academy of Sciences studies more thoroughly whether the theory of indirect land use change is corroborated by the actual on-the-ground evidence and should be applied in a policy context. Because of the nature of the amendment to an appropriations bill, Sen. Harkin's amendment would give the EPA one year to reconsider its assessment of international indirect land use change as part of the RFS program.
The Environmental Protection Agency's proposed indirect land use change rule would penalize domestic production of ethanol and biodiesel. Indirect land use change incorrectly assumes that increased production of U.S. biofuels will cause deforestation in Brazil and other foreign countries.
Land facts
The facts contradict this bizarre theory. Deforestation in Brazil during the past four years has been reduced by 50 percent, while during those same four years the production of U.S. biofuels has nearly tripled.
The international indirect land use change theory not only is lawed and premature, it also is not equitably imposed on all energy producers. EPA's proposed rule on the RFS in no way accounts for the international or domestic indirect impacts of other transportation fuels, including Middle East oil, Canadian tar sands oil or the coal-fired electricity needed to power plug in hybrid vehicles. If the indirect impact of one type of transportation fuel should be regulated, then it makes sense that all transportation fuels should face the same level of scrutiny.
Harkin's amendment would correct this problem by preventing EPA from spending money during fiscal year 2010 to implement a final rule that included the assessment of international indirect land use change. The amendment also clearly states that EPA cannot use this amendment to stall implementation of other aspects of the RFS included in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007.
U.S.-made biofuels are the only alternative we have today to foreign oil. The U.S. biofuels industry creates U.S. green jobs, enhances our national and economic security and reduces greenhouses gases.
Editors Note: The American Coalition for Ethanol, Renewable Fuels Association, American Farm Bureau Federation, National Corn Growers Association, National Farmers Union and National Sorghum Producers also contributed to this letter.
