EU Renewable Energy Targets in 2020:
Transport Scenarios
JEC Biofuels Programme
A joint study by
JRC / EUCAR / CONCAWE
GAIT Turkish-EU partnership for Sustainable Transportation
Session A. Green and Balanced Transport/ (d.) Alternative fuel options
Istanbul, 8-9 October 2015
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 1 of 16
Overview
• The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC)
• The JRC-EUCAR-CONCAWE (JEC) research collaboration
• 2014 scenario-based analysis of alternative fuels’ uptake in Europe
2020
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 2 of 16
The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 3 of 16
JRC Role…
Identifying and characterising
low-carbon technologies’
prospects - economics - contribution to
Europe's policy goals
via
Techno-economic assessments and modelling activities
of
Energy and Transport
developing and operating
experimental activities, mathematical models, methodologies simulating the
evolution of the European energy and transport technology mix
analysing the transition towards a low-carbon society.
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 4 of 16
JEC: A short history…
The JEC research collaboration was initiated in 2000 by:
 JRC: Joint Research Centre of the European Commission
 EUCAR: European Council for Automotive R&D
 CONCAWE: the oil companies' European association for
environment, health and safety in refining and distribution


2000-2014: Projects Completed
 Well-to-Wheels (WTW) Studies:
 Version 1 (2003)
 Version 2a and 2b (2007)
 Version 3c (2011)
 Version 4 (July, 2013): WTT and TTW Reports and Appendices
 Version 4a full set of reports: WTT/TTW/WTW and Appendices (March 2014)
 Impact of ethanol on vehicle evaporative emissions (SAE 2007-01-1928)
 Impact of oxygenates in gasoline on fuel consumption and emissions (2014)
 JEC Biofuels Study for a 2020 time horizon (May 2011)

2014 update of the 2011 JEC Biofuels Study (April 2014)
2015-2017: On-going projects
 Well-to-Wheels, Version 5
 JEC Alternative Fuels Study
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 5 of 16
Introduction and Disclaimer
The JEC Biofuels Programme is a technical analysis intended to assess possible
renewable fuel implementation scenarios in the light of the EU “Renewable Energy
Directive”, “Fuel Quality Directive”, and “Indirect Land-Use Change Directive” in the
transport sector by 2020.
These scenarios have been assessed by modelling (JEC Fleet & Fuels model) and
other analytical tools.
Disclaimer:
This study is not intended to commit the JEC partners to deliver any
particular technology or conclusion included in this study.
For a full description of activities, please consult reports available at:
http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/about-jec
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 6 of 16
Introduction: EU Regulatory Framework
•
Renewable Energy Directive (RED) [Directive 2009/28/EC]
•
•
•
Fuels Quality Directive (FQD) [Directive 2009/30/EC]
•
•
•
•
7% cap on conventional biofuels counting towards the RED and the FQD targets
0.5% non-binding target for advanced biofuels
Multiple counting for categories of advanced feedstocks
Feedstocks of non-biological origin count towards the target
Vehicle Regulated Emissions
•
•
•
Requires fuel suppliers to achieve at least 6% greenhouse gas (GHG) saving from fuels
supplied in 2020 with indicative targets
For GHG saving from biofuels, the actual GHG saving per energy unit is considered when
given by supplier. In other cases the default GHG values given by FQD1)
Specifies an E10 main grade with E5 ‘protection grade’ for older vehicles
Indirect Land Use Change Directive (ILUC) [Directive 2015/1513]
•
•
•
•
•
Requires Member States to meet 10% renewable energy share in the transport sector by 2020
Requires sustainable cultivation and production of biofuels as well as minimum greenhouse
gas (GHG) savings per energy unit
Light-duty (LD) passenger cars: Euro 5/5b to 2014, Euro 6 from 2015 onwards
Heavy-duty (HD) vehicles: Euro VI from 2014 onwards
Vehicle CO2 Emissions
•
•
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
Passenger cars: new vehicle fleet average 130 gCO2/km by 2015; proposal for 2020 was 95
gCO2/km
Light Commercial Vehicle (LCV) fleet: EC proposal of new fleet average of 175g/km by 2017,
target of 2020 is 147 g/km
8-9 October 2015
Slide 7 of 16
JEC Biofuels Programme: Objectives
Objectives of the JEC Biofuels Programme:
•
Clarify opportunities and barriers to achieve renewable energy and fuel
carbon intensity targets in the EU transport sector by 2020
•
Extend the “Fleet & Fuels” (F&F) Model to test legislative concepts for
Renewable Energy Directive (RED) and Fuel Quality Directive (FQD)
amendment.
•
Update the EU27 F&F Model baseline from 2005 to 2010
•
Update fixed demand values for non-road transport modes
•
Focus on conventional and alternative fuels and biofuel blends while
accounting for growth in alternative powertrains share in 2010-2020
•
Update the advanced biofuel supply outlook from the bottom up
•
Define and assess realistic and technically feasible alternative fuels
implementation scenarios for 2020
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 8 of 16
JEC Biofuels Programme: Approach
Develop a consensus on demand and supply outlook of alternative fuel
types and availability to meet the 2020 RED and FQD targets
European Energy and Transport industries’ research organisations
involved on equal footing in joint collaborative effort
•
Review and analyse data and projections
-
Conventional and advanced alternative fuels
Considering domestic production and imports
Including the most recent updates on WTW energy and GHG implications
•
Define and analyse possible biofuel blend implementation scenarios
•
Analyse uncertainties and their impacts on legislative targets
-
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
Fleet development (fleet activity and alternative powertrains)
Availability of non-conventional biofuels to the EU market
Market uptake of new blend grades
European electricity mix in 2020 (share of renewable energy sources, RES)
European Flight Path biofuels target
8-9 October 2015
Slide 9 of 16
2014 JEC Biofuels Study: Reasons for a revision
Since JEC Biofuels publication in 2011…
…changes in legislative initiatives, vehicle fleet, fuel and biofuel demand, availability
of advanced biofuels
~
Potential impact of these changes on the RED and FQD targets…
…JEC decision to update its Biofuels Study by…
•
Updating F&F Model (2010 baseline year) via historical fleet data (+) revised outlooks for
alternative vehicles
•
Updating fuel demand values for non-road transport modes
•
Adding ramp-up factors to new blend uptake to reflect market experience
•
Revising supply outlook for conventional and advanced biofuels
•
Re-evaluating all of the results via sensitivity analysis
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 10 of 16
‘Fleet & Fuels’ Model: Overview
•
A spreadsheet-based model simulating the EU27+2 vehicle fleet development and the
demand for fossil fuels and alternative fuels, including biofuels
•
The model can be used to simulate different combinations of vehicles, powertrains and
fuels (fossil and alternative)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Total fuel demand and diesel/gasoline balance
Total biofuels demand, including ethanol and biodiesel, HVO
Total renewable energy demand, including electricity, biogas
Renewable energy demand for road transport to be used for RED calculations
GHG emissions reduction according to FQD Article 7a
Legislative proposals, including:
- Cap on conventional biofuels
- Multiple counting for advanced biofuels
- Specific target for advanced biofuels
- ILUC reporting factor
Parameters relevant to determine fuel demand (for example):
•
•
•
•
•
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
Passenger car, van, bus and coach and heavy-duty truck demand
Vehicle efficiency and improvement in efficiency over time
Percentage diesel in new car sales
Introduction of alternative vehicles (FFV, LPGV, CNGV, electric vehicle, etc.)
Vehicle model year (vintage) assumed compatible with fuel grade
8-9 October 2015
Slide 11 of 16
Road Transport: Demand results 1/2
Road fuel (Mtoe)
Gasoline fossil to Car
Gasoline fossil to LCV
Sum fossil Gasoline
Diesel fossil to Car
Diesel fossil to LCV
Diesel fossil to HD
Sum fossil Diesel (incl. drop-in)
Diesel to Gasoline ratio (road only)
CNG
Of which CBG
LPG
LNG
H2
FAME
HVO/co-processing (drop-in)
BTL (drop-in)
Butanol
Adv. DME
Total Ethanol
Of which food/energy based
Of which non-food/energy based
Electricity
Of which Renewable Electricity
Sum road
2010
2015
2020
91
2.5
93
76
28
89
192
2.1
0.2
0.0
2.5
0.1
0.0
9.8
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.9
2.6
0.3
0.0
0.0
301
79
2.8
82
84
26
87
197
2.4
0.8
0.1
2.5
0.2
0.0
13.2
2.3
0.0
0.3
0.0
3.2
2.6
0.6
0.1
0.0
299
69
3.0
72
84
22
86
193
2.7
2.4
0.5
3.0
0.4
0.0
13.0
3.0
0.4
0.3
0.1
3.7
3.0
0.7
0.3
0.0
288
RED Contributions
Non-road
Road
Sum RED-%
0.8%
7.9%
8.7%
FQD GHG saving
4.3%
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
•
Demand for road fuels is projected to peak in 2015
and decline towards 2020
•
Given the assumptions of growth in activity and stock
size, the decrease in energy demand is the result of
significant energy efficiency improvements in vehicles
•
The split of diesel vs gasoline demand continues to
grow towards 2020 due to three main effects:
-
•
Share of diesel vehicles in car sales is 50% in 2020
(35% currently)
Alternative powertrains tend to replace more gasoline
vehicles
Gradual uptake of E10 demands more ethanol at the
expense of fossil gasoline towards 2020
Contributions of alternative fuels like CNG, LPG and
LNG are very small. However, the growth potential of
CNG could play a significant role.
8-9 October 2015
Slide 12 of 16
Road Transport: Demand results 2/2
Bio-diesel components in 2020
[Mtoe]
Bio-gasoline components in 2020
[Mtoe]
0.4
0.3
3.0
0.6
2.7
14.1
FAME
•
BTL
Conv. Ethanol
Adv. Ethanol
Butanol
Biofuels demand results
-
•
HVO
FAME dominates biofuel market
Ethanol demand increasing beyond 2010 driven by E10 introduction
HVO and BTL demand follow availability assumptions (backward compatible - not grade
dependent)
FAME / Ethanol demand by 2020
-
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
FAME demand in all transport sectors will be ~14.1 Mtoe/yr, fairly stable from 10.9 Mtoe/yr (2010)
Bio-gasoline demand will be ~3.7 Mtoe/yr, increasing from 2.6 Mtoe/yr (2010)
8-9 October 2015
Slide 13 of 16
Fuel demand scenarios: Background & Findings
4 biofuel implementation scenarios based on the following considerations:
CEN specifications for mass market fuels and vehicle compatibility outlook (ramp-up)
Market experience in E10 uptake (Germany, France, and Finland)
Scenario 1 (ref)
Gasoline Grade 1
Gasoline Grade 2
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Diesel Grade 1
Diesel Grade 2
Scenario 2
Gasoline Grade 1
Gasoline Grade 2
2010
2011
2012
2013
2019
2020
Scenario 1:
E10 & E5 ‘protection grade’
B7 diesel grade
2014 2015 2016
E5
E10 with ramp-up
2017
2018
2015 2016 2017
E5
E10 with ramp-up
2018
2019 2020
E10
E20 with ramp-up
Scenario 2:
E20 introduced in 2019
E10 becomes ‘protection grade’
Scenario 3:
E10 & E5 ‘protection grade’
B7 diesel main grade
B10 diesel for HD captive fleet
Scenario 4:
Combination of Scenarios 2 & 3
B7
2010
2011
2012
2013
Diesel Grade 1
Diesel Grade 2
Scenario 4
Gasoline Grade 1
Gasoline Grade 2
2018
B7
Diesel Grade 1
Diesel Grade 2
Scenario 3
Gasoline Grade 1
Gasoline Grade 2
2015 2016 2017
E5
E10 with ramp-up
2014
2019
2020
B7
B10 captive HD fleet*
2010
2011
Diesel Grade 1
Diesel Grade 2
* 2.5% of total HD diesel demand is B10
2012
2013
2014 2015 2016
E5
E10 with ramp-up
2017
2018
2019 2020
E10
E20 with ramp-up
B7
•
B10 captive HD fleet*
•
•
•
Only a limited impact can be expected from
the market introduction of higher blends
Introducing a new grade to the market takes
time and will therefore not make significant
difference until 2020
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
In scenarios 2 and 4 E10 becomes main grade
and is fully utilized. This results in a steep
increase of bio-gasoline demand
Higher bio-gasoline demand in scenarios 2 and
4 result in higher RED of 0.6%
Scenario 1
Scenario 2
Scenario 3
Scenario 4
Bio-gasoline
(Mtoe)
3.7
5.4
3.7
5.4
Bio-diesel
(Mtoe)
17.46
17.46
17.52
17.52
RED%
FQD%
8.7
9.3
8.7
9.3
4.3
4.7
4.3
4.7
8-9 October 2015
Slide 14 of 16
Biofuels Supply Outlook: Background
•
Fleet and Fuels model uses different biofuels pathways classified according to the FQD
•
Each pathway has the default GHG emission value for 2010
•
For ‘conventional’ pathways, it is assumed that pathways that do not meet the GHG saving
threshold will improve towards the threshold of 50% in 2020
•
For the ‘advanced’ biofuels pathways the default GHG emission values are those of the FQD
•
Some pathways have multiple counting factors
•
Where applicable ILUC factors are applied for individual pathways
•
Each pathway is also flagged when it is ‘conventional’ biofuel subject to the cap of the ILUC
Directive.
•
For the HVO and co-processing production capacity the reported 2012 feedstock mix of Neste
Oil was used
•
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
The assumption is that the mix will be composed of 50% conventional crude palm oil and
50% waste material towards 2020.
8-9 October 2015
Slide 15 of 16
Conventional and Advanced biofuels: JEC definition
‘Conventional’ and ‘Advanced’ can refer to…
the feedstock used in a certain renewable energy production process.
OR
to a conversion technology.
•
•
Within the feedstock dimension, conventional and advanced are also referred to as
‘low-ILUC risk’ and ‘ILUC risk’ respectively.
On the technology dimension, conventional and advanced strongly depend on
technology maturity over time.
Conventional biofuels: Biofuels
produced from ILUC risk
feedstocks regardless of the
conversion technology.
Advanced biofuels: Biofuels
produced from low ILUC risk
feedstocks regardless of the
technology.
Non-conventional biofuels:
Biofuels produced from low ILUC
risk feedstocks including
advanced technology.
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 16 of 16
Conventional Biofuels: EU demand vs capacity
•
•
•
Current European installed production capacity of ethanol and FAME is sufficient to
cover the projected demand in 2020.
The projected 2020 ethanol and FAME demand indicates that it could be covered by
domestic production at installed capacity usage rate of 73% for ethanol and 67% for
FAME.
The usage of European ethanol and FAME capacity strongly depends on the world
biofuels market conditions and trade flows.
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 17 of 16
Non-conventional Biofuels
•
•
Bottom-up approach to collect and analyse announced projects (global scale)
Scope is bio-derived components:
-
Ligno-cellulosic Ethanol
Butanol
Methanol
HVO/Co-processing
Biomass-To-Liquid (BTL)
Dimethyl Ether (DME)
World outlook of non-conventional biofuels in 2020 is ~9.2 Mtoe, EU is ~4.2 Mtoe
•
•
Main sources are:
- Hart Energy (2012): “advanced biofuels outlook 2025”
- IEA Task 39: “Status of Advanced Biofuels demonstration Facilities in 2012”
- NER300 projects funded by the European Commission
- Additional publicly announced projects and companies consultation
Focus of JEC study is on availability, not on costs and investments
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 18 of 16
Conclusions: General remarks
•
Achieving the 2020 targets is now less likely compared to 2011. Reasons:
-
•
Compared to 2011 the fleet baseline is characterised by a larger share of old vehicles
Slower uptake than expected of gasoline grade E10
Advanced biofuels supply outlook remains uncertain especially on drop-in fuels
Changed alternative vehicle assumptions
Reduced likelihood of introduction of new higher blend grades (B10/E20)
Results depend on:
-
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
Compatibility of: vehicles and the supply and distribution system for all fuel products
European (CEN) fuel specifications to enable timely market uptake of biofuel blends
Biofuel supply, especially the availability of certified sustainable biofuels to Europe
Non-road contributions to the RED and FQD
Consumers’ readiness to purchase (biofuel) market blends and compatible vehicles
8-9 October 2015
Slide 19 of 16
Conclusions:
•
None of the scenarios achieve the RED target
of 10% renewable energy in transport.
-
•
The FQD target (-6% GHG savings) is also
not met.
-
•
Results range from 7.83% (EC ILUC proposal)
to 8.75% (Council compromise)
Including ILUC results in a big shortfall
The overall impact based on the sectors’ trend
since 2009 is in any case very positive.
Achieving the EU targets for alternative transportation fuels is subject to the ambition level of
using sustainably produced, low-ILUC risk biofuels.
Decisions on transport fuels policy measures must be based on sound and detailed impact
analysis, covering all vehicle, powertrain and infrastructure challenges and global supply
projections of sustainable renewable fuels
While the JEC scenario analysis is focussed on the EU level, the impacts of Member State
initiatives are also likely to be important: yet, initiatives at the national level must not increase
fuel disparity – and resulting market fragmentation.
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 20 of 16
Contacts
THANK YOU FOR ATTENTION
***
The study report is available at:
http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/about-jec
***
For questions / inquiries / requests / notes
to the JEC Consortium,
please use the centralised mail address:
infoJEC@jrc.ec.europa.eu
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 21 of 16
JEC Biofuels Programme: Contributors
JRC
Laura Lonza
Alberto Moro
EUCAR
Thomas Becker
Michael Bippes
Valérie Boch
Hans-Peter Deeg
Sebastian Enrico Finke
Andrea Gerini
Per Hanarp
Heinz Hass
Eberhard Holder
Eva Iverfeldt
Opel
VW
Renault
Porsche
VW
Fiat
Volvo
Ford
Daimler
Scania
Lisa Jacobsson
Lisa Johansson
Jürgen Kölch
Heiko Maas
Frédéric Novel-Cattin
Béatrice Perrier
Willibald Prestl
Anders Röj
Jörg Wind
Volvo
Volvo
BMW
Ford
Renault
PSA
BMW
Volvo
Daimler
CONCAWE
Frederick Bernard
Sophie Boreux
Marta Chrusch
Carlos Diaz Garcia
Jeff Farenback-Brateman
Gerd Hagenow
Heather Hamje
Liesbeth Jansen
Baudouin Kelecom
Sari Kuusisto
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
TOTAL
TOTAL
BP
Repsol
ExxonMobil
SHELL
CONCAWE
Kuwait Petroleum
ExxonMobil
Neste Oil
Jean-François Larivé
Elena Marin
Pedro Antonio Medina Robledo
Walter Mirabella
Robin Nelson
Catherine Price
Alan Reid
David Rickeard
Ken Rose
Tom Venderbosch
CONCAWE
Repsol
CEPSA
LyondellBasell
CONCAWE
SHELL
CONCAWE
CONCAWE
CONCAWE
CONCAWE
8-9 October 2015
Slide 22 of 16
Backup: F&F Model: Alternative powertrain parameters
Alternative Fuel Passenger Cars
In 2020 New Sales In 2020 Vehicle Fleet
Flex-Fuel Vehicles (FFV)
0.5%; 80`000
0.2%; 600`000
Compressed Natural Gas Vehicles (CNGV)
3%; 480`000
0.8%; 2.3 million
Liquefied Propane Gas Vehicles (LPGV)
3%; 480`000
1.6%; 4.5 million
Electric Vehicles
3%; 480`000
0.8%; 2.1 million
Battery Electric (BEV) & Plug-in Hybrid (PHEV)
Hydrogen Vehicles (FCEV)
0.25%; 40`000
0.04%; 100`000
Alternative Fuel Vans
In 2020 New Sales In 2020 Vehicle Fleet
Compressed Natural Gas Vehicles (CNGV)
3%; 70`000
1.2%; 370`000
Light Commercial Vehicles (LCV)
Liquefied Propane Gas Vehicles (LPGV)
1%; 20`000
0.6%; 180`000
• New LCV average CO2 target in 2020: 147g/km
Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFV)
0.5%; 11`000
0.16%; 50`000
• Sales in 2020: 2.2 million/a; Overall fleet in 2020: 31 million
Electric Vehicles
2%; 45`000
0.8%; 240`000
• Alternative fuel vehicles in the market, Fuel Cell Vehicles (FCVs) in Battery Electric (BEV) & Plug-in Hybrid (PHEV)
Hydrogen Vehicles (FCEV)
0.25%; 6`000
0.04%; 14`000
2017
In 2020 New Sales
• Total fleet mileage from 395 to 424 billion v-km/a in 2020,
Alternative Fuel Heavy Duty Vehicles
3.5t to 7.5t to 16t to
Bus(YoY growth: 0.73% until 2020)
> 32t
7.5t 16t 32t
Coach
Compressed Natural Gas Vehicles (CNGV)
2% 1.5% 2% ==
5%
Heavy-Duty (HD) Vehicles
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG)
==
==
1% 1% ==
• New truck average YoY efficiency improvement: ~1.5%
Di-Methyl Ether Vehicles (DMEV)
==
== 0.5% 0.25% ==
• Sales in 2020: 0.7 million/a; Fleet in 2020: 8 million
95% Ethanol (E95) Vehicles
==
== 0.5% ==
2%
• Alternative fuel vehicles entering the market in specific HD classes Electric Vehicles (EV)
==
==
==
== 0.25%
• Total fleet mileage increases towards 2020 with 1.2% YoY growth
Hydrogen Vehicles (FCEV)
==
==
==
== 0.5%
Passenger Cars
• New car average CO2 target in 2020: 95 gCO2/km
• Diesel / gasoline new sales share 2020: 50% / 50%
• New sales in 2020: 16 million/a; Overall fleet in 2020: 275 million
• Alternative fuel vehicles in the market, Fuel Cell Vehicles (FCVs) in
2017
• Total fleet mileage Year-on-Year (YoY) growth: 1.8% until 2020
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 23 of 16
Backup: Biofuels Supply Outlook: Pathways used
Biofuels pathways used
EU2009
EC2012
EP2013
iLUC factor
Cap
applied?
Counting
factor
Cap
applied?
Counting
factor
Cap
applied?
[gCO2eq/MJ]
44.2
43.0
43.0
43.0
43.0
40.0
24.0
43.0
[gCO2eq/MJ]
12
12
12
12
12
13
13
12
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
[1,2 or4]
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
[1,2 or4]
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Ethanol from Wine
Ethanol from Farmed wood
Ethanol from Waste wood
Ethanol from Wheat straw
Ethanol from advanced
Butanol from advanced
Butanol from conventionals
Methanol from waste wood
15.0
25.0
22.0
13.0
35.3
35.3
35.3
5.0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
No
No
No
No
No
No
5%
No
Pathways diesel pool
FAME from Rapeseed
FAME from Soybean
FAME from Palm Oil
FAME from Sunflower seed
FAME from conventionals
52.0
58.0
52.5
41.0
47.3
55
55
55
55
55
No
No
No
No
No
1
1
1
1
1
Diesel from Farmed wood FT
Diesel from Waste oil
Diesel from Waste wood FT
Diesel from advanced
HVO/co-processing from Waste oil
6.0
14.0
4.0
35.3
20.5
0
0
0
0
0
No
No
No
No
No
HVO/co-processing from Rapeseed oil
HVO/co-processing from Palm Oil
42.8
44.2
55
55
Pathway DME pool
DME from Waste wood
5.0
0
Pathways gasoline pool
Ethanol from Wheat
Ethanol from Maize
Ethanol from Barley
Ethanol from Rye
Ethanol from Triticale
Ethanol from Sugar beet
Ethanol from Sugar cane
Ethanol from other conventionals
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
Applied in all 4 cases
GHG intensity
in 2020
CEU2013
Counting
Cap
factor
applied?
Counting
factor
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
[1,2 or4]
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
7%
7%
7%
7%
7%
7%
7%
7%
[1,2 or4]
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
2
2
4
2
2
1
2
No
No
No
No
No
No
6%
No
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
No
No
No
No
No
No
7%
No
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
2
5%
5%
5%
5%
5%
1
1
1
1
1
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
1
1
1
1
1
7%
7%
7%
7%
7%
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
No
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
2
No
No
No
No
No
1
2
1
1
2
No
No
No
No
No
2
2
2
2
2
No
No
1
1
5%
5%
1
1
6%
6%
1
1
7%
7%
1
1
No
2
No
2
No
1
No
2
8-9 October 2015
Slide 24 of 16
Backup: Blending (different legislative concepts)
•
Fuel suppliers have the option to optimize their conventional biofuels usage in gasoline and diesel, given
the cap. Depending on the biofuels GHG intensity and their cost, a fuel supplier will seek maximizing GHG
saving at minimum cost. This study simulates scenarios and therefore the following blending assumptions
are made:
•
Current legislation RED (2009/28/EC) and FQD (2009/30/EC)
1. Blend all available advanced biofuels (excluding drop-ins)
2. Add conventional biofuels up to biofuels demand as determined by the F&F model (E5, E10 and B7)
3. Blend all available drop-in biofuels
•
European Commission ILUC proposal of October 2012
1. Blend all available advanced biofuels (excluding drop-ins)
2. Add conventional biofuels up to biofuels demand as determined by F&F model (E5, E10 and B7)
3. Blend all available drop-in biofuels
4. Assume that fuel suppliers will do steps 2 and 3 in order to maximize the FQD GHG reduction as the cap of 5% only
applies to RED target.
•
European Parliament (EP) vote in 1st reading of September 2013
1. Blend available advanced biofuels
2. Blend conventional biofuels up to the cap of 6% and not more than the biofuels demand as determined by F&F model
(E5, E10 and B7)
3. Blend only advanced drop-in biofuels
It is assumed that fuel suppliers will not maximize the FQD like in the EC ILUC proposal step 4, as the cap also applies to
the FQD
•
Council compromise proposal of December 2103
The same blending priorities are assumed as for the EP vote with an accounting cap on conventional biofuels of 7%.
Reproduction permitted
with due
acknowledgement
8-9 October 2015
Slide 25 of 16