1. Lecture 11:
Tr anspor tation, Petroleum Use,
and Alter natives
Guest Lecture: Anthony Eggert
Prof. Dan Sperling
November 13, 2012
Fall Quarter 2012
Energy and Environmental Aspects of Transportation
Civil and Environmental Engineering (ECI) 163
Environmental Science and Policy (ESP) 163

2. Lecture Outline
• Recap and completion of petroleum slides
– 10 facts about transportation and oil use
– Summary of key issues
• Alternative fuels in transportation
– Fuel, vehicle characteristics
– Available alternatives to petroleum
– Impacts on emissions, energy
– Policy strategies

3. 11 Facts of Oil (recap of earlier lecture)
1. Transportation uses over 1/4 of all energy in the U.S.
2. Transportation uses over half of the world’s oil production
3. Transportation depends almost exclusively on petroleum
4. U.S. domestic oil production has declined and imports have
increased
5. World vehicle population (and therefore oil use) is increasing at a
rapid rate
6. World oil price is expected to “peak” “soon”
7. Most of world oil is owned by gov’t-controlled oil companies
(~80%)
8. The world is NOT running out of hydrocarbon energy
9. Unconventional Oil Has Large(r) Environmental Costs including
carbon and other emissions (externalities)
10. Oil resources unevenly distributed
11. Demand is inelastic and prices are erratic

4. Snapshot of US Petroleum Use
• Transportation consumes 28% of U.S. energy
• Transportation is 93% fueled by oil in the U.S
• Transportation uses 67% of U.S. oil
• U.S. oil consumption is 18.8 million barrels/day (~22%
of world consumption)
• U.S. oil consumption is 55% imported (declining)
 So what’s the problem?
Sources: Davis, Diegel, Boundy (2012). Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 31. USEIA (March 2012). Monthly Energy
Review

5. Problems of Petroleum Dependence
• Economic
– We depend on a resource for which our domestic supply is limited
– Transfer of wealth ($200-400 bill/yr) from U.S. to foreign countries
– Oil price shocks have wider impacts on the economy
– Estimated cost to US economy is $2Trillion from 2005-2010 (Greene)
• Geopolitics
– Most world petroleum is held by government-controlled oil companies (~80%)
– Many oil-producing countries can be politically unstable, undemocratic
– Some are using petro-dollars for politically disruptive purposes (especially in Venezuela,
Iran)
– Military expenditures for defending oil supplies
– High oil costs are especially disruptive to poorer countries
• Environmental
– Environmental externalities from petroleum combustion including local pollution and
climate change
– Unconventional oil options produce higher CO2 emissions and have other large
environmental costs
 Near exclusive dependence on oil means transition to
alternatives is likely to be challenging

6. Pres. Bush’s 2006 State of the Union
“America is addicted to oil … The best way to break this
addiction is through technology ... We must … change
how we power our automobiles. We will increase our
research in better batteries for hybrid and electric
cars, and in pollution-free cars that run on hydrogen.
We'll also fund additional research in cutting-edge
methods of producing ethanol, not just from corn, but
from wood chips and stalks, or switch grass.”
(Applause.)

7. Energy Independence?
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-june-16-2010/an-energy-independent-future

8. Source: Greene, “Low Carbon Transportation”, ARB Chairs Lecture, 2012

9. The Real Problem
Source: Greene, “Low Carbon Transportation”, ARB Chairs Lecture, 2012

10. What does oil dependence cost?
1. Loss of potential GDP = producers’ & consumers’
surplus losses in oil markets (dynamic).
2. Dislocation losses of GDP due to oil price shocks.
3. Transfer of wealth due to monopoly pricing and price
shocks (requires counterfactual competitive price).
Estimate - $2Trillion from 2005-2012
Source: Greene, “Low Carbon Transportation”, ARB Chairs Lecture, 2012

11. On Alternatives to Oil…
“ The Stone Age did not end for
lack of stone, and the Oil Age will
end long before the world runs
out of oil”
– Sheikh Zaki Yamani
1970s and ’80s Saudi Arabian oil minister

12. W hich vehicle/fuel alter native will
win?
Electric? Hybrid/PHEV? Biofuel?
Nat. Gas /
Fuel Cell? Bio-methane? Other?

13. “Ener g y Car rier” ADHD*
• 30 year s ago – Synfuels (oil shale,
coal)
• 25 year s ago – Methanol
• 18 year s ago – Electricity (Batter y
EVs)
• 8 year s ago – Hydrogen (Fuel cells)
• 4 year s ago – Ethanol/Biofuels
• Today – Electricity again
(EV+PHEV )
• Next year ?
*Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): ADHD is a problem with
inattentiveness, over-activity, impulsivity, or a combination of these. (Source:
US National Library for Medicine)

14. Many Possible Policy Approaches
and Many Possible Low Carbon Fuels
14

15. Alternative Fuels and Vehicles
There are many complex paths by which we can get diverse
primary energy sources on-board our vehicles.
Energy carriers, fuels for
Vehicle Technologies
transportation
Primary energy Gasoline combustion
Coal-to-liquid
sources Diesel combustion
Gasoline
Coal Hybrid gasoline-electric
Diesel
Petroleum Flex-fuel ethanol-gasoline
Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)
Natural gas Flex-fuel biodiesel-diesel
Compressed natural gas (CNG)
Solar Plug-in hybrid electric
Liquefied natural gas (LNG)
Wind LPG/LNG
Electricity
Geothermal CNG
Hydrogen
Nuclear Electric
Ethanol
Agricultural crops Hydrogen combustion
Biodiesel
Waste Hydrogen fuel cell
Biobutanol

16. Alternative Fuels and Vehicles
There are many complex paths by which we can get diverse
primary energy sources on-board our vehicles.
Energy carriers, fuels for
Vehicle Technologies
transportation
Primary energy Gasoline combustion
Coal-to-liquid
sources Diesel combustion
Gasoline
Coal Fossil-based fuels Hybrid gasoline-electric
Diesel
Petroleum Flex-fuel ethanol-gasoline
Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG)
Natural gas Flex-fuel biodiesel-diesel
Compressed natural gas (CNG)
Solar Plug-in hybrid electric
Liquefied natural gas (LNG)
Wind LPG/LNG
Electricity
Geothermal CNG
Hydrogen
Nuclear Electric
Ethanol
Agricultural crops Hydrogen combustion
Biodiesel
Waste Hydrogen fuel cell
Biofuels Biobutanol Versatile energy carriers

17. Many Ways of Producing Biofuels - production pathways

18. Many ways of producing hydrogen (and electricity)
Nuclear Coal
Methanol Farm
Wind Coal Ethanol
Solar
Gasification
Electrolysis Fossil Fuel
of water Reformation
Fossil Fuels
H Y D R O GEN Tar Sands
Natural Gas
Steam BioHydrogen
Reformation
Biomass
G asification
Fossil Landfills
Fuels Algae Leafy
Plants
Wood Chips Agricultural
Waste
Source: Sperling and Gordon, 2009

19. Vehicles to Utilize Alternative fuels
Volkswagen Jetta
(Diesel)
Tesla Roadster Toyota Prius
GM’s Volt (Plug-in Hybrid) (electric) (Hybrid gas-electric, plug-in)
Honda Civic GX CNG Honda FCX Clarity
BMW Hydrogen 7 (hydrogen fuel cell)

20. Evaluation Criteria
• Costs
• Safety
• Local pollution
• GHGs
• Performance
• “Utility”
• Availability of energy distribution infrastructure
• Energy supply

21. Fuel Considerations
(performance and utility)
Properties of fuels and energy carriers
Mass Volume
energy energy State
Fuel or energy carrier
density density (at STP)
• Critical alternative (MJ/kg) (MJ/L)
fuel considerations Gasoline 46 34 Liquid
– Chemical, physical,
Diesel 46 37 Liquid
and energy
characteristics Ethanol 30 24 Liquid
– Refueling time E85 33 26 Liquid
– Availability of Biodiesel 42 33 Liquid
inexpensive primary Natural gas (3600 psi) 50 10 Gas
energy sources
LPG propane 50 25 Liquid
Hydrogen (5000 psi) 143 5.6 Gas
Electric (PB-acid) 0.09-0.11 0.14-0.17 Solid
Electric (NiMH) 0.22 0.36 Solid
Electric (Lithium-ion) 0.54-0.72 0.9-1.9 Solid

22. Estimated Gasoline-Equivalent Costs of Alternative
Liquid Fuels
2-14

23. Cost of alternatives (fuels/vehicle)
Source: USDOE, 2011

24. Infrastructure
Number of fueling stations in the U.S., 2012
• Potential
Fuel or energy carrier Stations
infrastructure issues:
– Primary resource
Gasoline ~121,446
location
Liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) 2,652 – Fuel properties
Ethanol (E85) 2,544 – Distribution system:
pipeline, freight, etc
Compressed natural gas (CNG) 1,091
– Refueling stations
Biodiesel (B20 or greater) 679
Electricity 12,761 • Minimize problems
Hydrogen 58 with city-by-city
approach
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) 58
Sources: US DOE, updated 08/25/2012.http://www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/fuels/stations_counts.html
US Census (2012).

25. Diesel Vehicles
• Current status: Fuel widely available
Limited light-duty vehicle options ~10 models
Volkswagen, BMW, Jeep, Mercedes
• Requirements
– Fuel: Widely available
Volkswagen Jetta
– Vehicle: Compression ignition engine, exhaust treatment
• Costs
– Fuel: Approximately same as gasoline
– Vehicle: Can be expensive: $1000 to $4000 more per vehicle
• Issues/bonuses: Getting diesel emissions as low as gasoline
Better performance
• Energy impacts: 15-30% energy/petrol reduction due to efficiency
• Air Quality impacts: Can be even with gasoline
(with mor e expensive exhaust tr eatment)
• GHG impact: 15-30% reduction
Mercedes-Benz BLUETEC

26. CNG Vehicles
• Current status: Natural gas is widely available (but not as CNG)
Very limited light-duty vehicle options (1 model)
Honda Civic GX NGV
• Requirements
– Fuel: Must be in pressurized (3600 psi) form
– Vehicle: Fuel storage tank, engine, fuel system
Honda Civic GX NGV
• Costs
– Fuel: Natural gas is ~50% cheaper per energy unit
– Vehicle: Can be expensive: $5,000+ more per vehicle
• Issues/bonuses: Cleaner: Lower emission control cost
• Energy impacts: ~100% reduction in petroleum use
Roughly same energy use as conventional vehicle
• Air Quality impacts: 60-90% reductions of NOx, HC, CO, PM (for trucks)
• GHG impact: 20-25% reduction
Methane (a GHG…) leakage is an issue

27. Ethanol Vehicles
• Current status: Widely available – all vehicles are E10-capable
Millions of “flex-fuel” vehicle are E85-capable
10% of U.S. motor vehicle fuel in 2012*
• Requirements
– Fuel: Cheap agricultural feedstock (like corn)
– Vehicle: Up to E10 – none; E85 - minor modifications
• Costs
– Fuel: Can be cheaper than gasoline (depending on world oil price)
– Vehicle: E10 - free; E85 - minor (<$400/vehicle)
• Issues: Sources: Cellulosic, “Advanced,” “Second Generation” biofuels
Indirect impacts: land use effect due to cropland expansion
• Energy impacts: Reductions in overall energy use:
10-20% reduction per gallon displaced (corn-derived)
50-80% reduction per gallon displaced (sugarcane-derived)
70-90% reduction per gallon displaced (cellulosic/waste-derived)
• Air Quality impacts: Modest HC, NMOG, NOx reductions
• GHG impact: 10-20% reduction to 100%+ increase (corn-derived)
70-90% reduction to 50%+ increase (cellulosic/waste-derived)
*Source: Renewable Fuels Association (2012). Accelerating Industry Innovation – 2012 Ethanol Industry Outlook.

28. Biodiesel Vehicles
• Current status: Limited by low numbers of diesel vehicles (~10 models)
All diesel vehicles are B20-capable
Total biodiesel production is <500 million gallon/yr
Straight vegetable oil (SVO) requires vehicle modifications
• Requirements
– Fuel: Cheap agricultural feedstock (waste oils, virgin oils (soy))
– Vehicle: Up to B20 – none; E85 - minor modifications
• Costs
– Fuel: Can be cheaper than diesel (depending on world oil price) Volkswagen
(Diesel, B20-capable)
– Vehicle: B20 - free; >B20 - minor modifications; SVO
• Issues: Sources: Crop- vs. Waste-derived (greases, animal fats)
Indirect impacts: land use effect due to cropland expansion
• Energy impacts: 50-80% reduction in energy use per gallon diesel displaced
• Air Quality impacts: Modest HC, NMOG, PM reductions; mixed NOx results
• GHG impact: 50-80% reduction to 100%+ increase with land use effects

29. Plug-In Hybrid Vehicles
• Current status: Chevy Volt first ‘large production’ plug-in hybrid ( approx 1,000/month)
Toyota Prius plus introduce in March 2012
Others coming in 2012/2013
• Requirements
– Fuel: Recharging stations (home, work, other) Toyota Prius
(retrofit plug-in hybrid)
– Vehicle: Energy-dense inexpensive battery pack (Lithium Ion?)
• Costs
– Fuel: Electricity is cheaper (>50%) per energy unit than petroleum
– Vehicle: Incremental cost $5,000 to $10,000 per vehicle (?)
• Issues: How many miles will be on grid electricity?
Where does electricity come from?
Battery technology (Lithium-Ion?) and cost
GM Volt
(PHEV40, 2010)
• Energy impacts: ~20-40% reduction (if never uses grid electricity)
~35-60% reduction (if commonly uses grid electricity)
• Air Quality impacts: Small reduction (if never use grid electricity)
Major reductions in local (on-vehicle) emissions Saturn Vue
(PHEV10, 2010)
• GHG impact: 20-60% reduction (depending on use of grid electricity)

30. Electric Vehicles
• Current status: Here in small numbers: neighborhood vehicles
Nissan Leaf first 'large production' vehicles (~1,000/month).
Other small volume production include (for example): Tesla Roadster, Model S; Fisker; Toyota
Rav4, Honda Fit EV, Ford Focus EV
• Requirements
– Fuel: Recharging stations (home, work, other)
– Vehicle: Energy-dense, inexpensive battery pack (Lithium Ion?)
Tesla Roadster
• Costs
(2008/9)
– Fuel: Electricity is cheaper (>80%) per energy unit than petroleum
– Vehicle: Premium of greater than $10,000 per full-size vehicle…
Smaller neighborhood vehicles (~$10k GEM)
• Issues: Where does electricity come from?
Battery technology (Lithium-Ion?) and cost
Refueling time of several hours
Smart EV (2010)
• Energy impacts: Vehicles far more efficient (~75% vs. ~20%)
100% petroleum reduction
~30-60% overall energy reduction (depends on elec. sources…)
• Air Quality impacts: ~Zero local (on-vehicle) emissions
Can offer major reductions in overall emissions
GEM (2008)
• GHG impact: ~30-60% reduction (depending on energy sources)

31. Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles
Hydrogen: an energy carrier that can be derived from many sources
Fuel cell: an electrochemical device which converts chemical energy
to useful electrical work
Fuel cell (PEM)
Hydrogen fuel cell vehicle
Source: Dana Corporation
H2 + O2  H2O + Fuel cell stack Compressed
Energy hydrogen storage

32. H2 Fuel Cell Vehicles
• Current status: Prototype/Demonstration phase: (100s of vehicles being tested)
Vehicles in showrooms 2014-2016 including
from Toyota, Hyundai, Daimler, GM
Assuming adequate infrastructure exists
~60 hydrogen (H2) stations in the U.S.
• Requirements
– Fuel: Strategic infrastructure development
– Vehicle: Inexpensive fuel cell stack, hydrogen storage Honda FCX Clarity
(hydrogen fuel cell)
• Costs
– Fuel: Can be cheaper than gasoline (only at high world oil price)
– Vehicle: Very high for current small volume ($10k/month for UCD lease!)
• Issues: Where hydrogen comes (it is a versatile energy carrier)
Fuel cell vehicle costs (platinum, hydrogen storage)
• Energy impacts: ~0% reduction (coal as energy source)
~50% reduction (distributed natural gas-reformation)
~90% reduction (renewable primary energy source)
• Air Quality impacts: ~Zero local (on-vehicle) emissions
Major reductions in overall emissions (if coal not energy source)
• GHG impact: 50-90% reduction (depending on energy source)

33. Evaluation Criteria
• Costs
• Safety
• Local pollution
• GHGs (life cycle)
• Performance
• “Utility”
• Availability of energy distribution
infrastructure
• Energy supply

34. Miscellaneous
• My office hours (esp concerning
paper #2)
– Today 3:15-4:30
– TH 3:15-4:45
• Paper #2 due next tues
• Guest speakers TH (NRDC and oil
company)

35. Fuel Lifecycle – Gasoline
73 g/MJ
7 14 g/MJ
g/MJ
1 1 g/MJ
g/MJ
Oil Well Refinery Vehicle
Transportat Transportat
ion ion
Gasoline
96 gCO2-
eq/MJ

36. Fuel Lifecycle – Corn Ethanol
Emissions
36 38 are
g/MJ g/MJ Offset
2 3
Corn Field g/MJ Bio-Refinery g/MJ
Vehicles
Transportation Transportat
ion
Blend
with
gasoline
30
g/MJ -12 g/MJ
Land Use Corn Ethanol
Change 65-105 gCO2-eq/MJ
Co-products

37. Biofuel Impacts
• What are the processes that created
Corn
the biofuel?
 Clear land for farming
 Harvest, mill crop
 Ferment, distillation
Sugarcane
 Transport
• Alternative fuels must be
assessed on a life-cycle
basis:
– Systems approach
– Upstream emissions
– Upstream energy
– Varying results, depending on
feedstock and process…
Source: Based on Wang (2007), GREET

38. GHG Emissions of Alt Fuels
Various advanced vehicle technologies have the potential to
reduce life-cycle vehicle GHG emission by 23-66% by 2030.
Vehicle cycle Fuel upstream Vehicle energy use
Life-cycle greenhouse gas
emissions (g CO2/km)
23% 26% 29%
300
41% 41% 43%
66%
200
100
0
e
e
l)
l
id
c
)
p)
se
ue
lin
lin
tri
no
br
ro
e
ec
so
id
so
hy
ha
Di
,c
es
el
ga
ga
et
s ic
-in
s-
,r
nt
n
nt
ga
ug
lo
sic
or
rre
ie
lu
Pl
(c
id
lo
f ic
el
Cu
br
lu
5*
(c
Ef
el
Hy
E8
5*
(c
E8
5
E8
Vehicle technology
Source: Adapted from Bandivadekar et al, 2007.

39. Major Alternative Fuel Policies in US
• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
– Supported alternative fuels and vehicle technologies (grants, tax
credits, research and development, fleet funding, etc)
• Renewable Fuel Standard (Energy Independence and
Security Act of 2007)
– Blending subsidies: Ethanol $0.51/gal, Biodiesel $0.50-1.00/gal.
– Mandate for 35 billion gallon of biofuels in transportation fuels by
2022
• Vehicle purchasing
– Tax deductions for EVs and PHEVs
• State and local programs
– Biofuel mandates in many U.S. states (E10, B2, B5)
– California’s Zero Emission Vehicle mandate
(electric vehicles, hydrogen fuel cells, plug-in hybrids)
– California’s Low-Carbon Fuel Standard

40. Many Possible Policy Approaches
and Many Possible Low Carbon Fuels
• Volumetric mandates
– e.g. US Renewable Fuel Standard
• Fuel subsidies
– eg, corn ethanol and biodiesel
• Market instruments
– carbon taxes or cap and trade
• Low carbon fuel standard
40

41. RFS (national)
• Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007
mandates the use of 35 billion gallon of biofuels in
U.S. transportation fuels by 2022

42. RFS Details [new slide]
• Imposed on oil companies
• Only targets biofuels
• GHG emissions of corn etoh must be 20+% better
than gasoline (including ILUC, but only for
“new” plants)
• GHG emissions of cellulosic must be 50+% better
than gasoline
• EPA can give waivers for cellulosic fuels if they
are not available (and have done so)

43. What is LCFS
Performance based: GHG intensity target for
transport fuels E × CI n
∑ Total GHG emission
i i
AFCI ( gCO2 - eq/MJ ) = n
i
∑ E × EER
i
i i Total transportation fuels produced/displaced
Lifecycle measurement for “carbon intensity”
Regulated parties are transport energy suppliers
(oil providers, plus others who want to earn
credits, such as biofuel, electricity, NG and H2
providers)
All transport fuels are included
Harnesses market forces: Allows trading of credits
among fuel suppliers, which stimulates investment
and continuing innovation in low-carbon fuels
43

44. California LCFS Program
Adopted April 2009, took effect Jan 2010
Applies to on-road transport fuels
Excludes air and maritime (where California has limited authority)
Separate targets for gasoline and diesel (10% reduction for
each)
Allows trading between these two targets
Default measurements and opt-in procedure for each activity in
energy chain
Encourages further innovation and investment in low-carbon practices
Refinements still in progress
Rules on “sustainability”
Lifecycle calculations for additional energy paths
44

45. LCFS is Spreading (updated)
EU moving toward an LCFS; its “Fuel Quality Directive” is very
similar to California LCFS (amended Dec 2008)
11 northeastern and mid-Atlantic states signed a MOU in
January 2009 committing to cooperate in developing a regional
LCFS
Early version of Waxman-Markey climate bill contained an LCFS
One proposal for combining LCFS and RFS
0% target until 2022 for LCFS: Would operate parallel to RFS until 2022
If fully implemented, RFS would reduce GHG intensity by 4.6% in 2022
In 2023, LCFS and RFS rolled together, with 5% GHG-intensity reduction
target
In 2030, target would increase to 10%
45

46. Key Challenges of an Expanded LCFS
1) Indirect land use change
2) Leakage and shuffling
3) Energy security
4) Environmental and social sustainability
46

47. Challenge 1. Indirect Land Use Change
When lands with rich soil and biomass carbon deposits are
initially converted to agricultural production, a large amount of
carbon is emitted.
Massive consumption of biofuels in the U.S. leads to expansion
of cultivated land area in and outside of the US (to replace
diverted ag production)
These iLUC effects cannot be directly observed or easily measured
47

48. Magnitude of ILUC
(initial CARB Estimates)
100 Direct GHG emission Indirect GHG emission
90
80 10% below the current average fuel GHG intensity
70
60
50
40
30
20
M
10
O
C
g
J
2
e
(
)
/
0
- l -C
w o
o cn
r
B -m
n
h
S
o ea
n
b
y
o
a
e
t
o
u
-c
e
s
n
g
u
e
c
a
i
l
-s
r
-cv
n
o
a
e
W
l
i
t
n
o
i
c
r
v
d
g
v
V
D
U
e
a
e
a
s
L
r
r
b
u
d
n
h
S
i
t
m
o
a
y
r
c
e
G
N
s
C
t
j
f
)
(
l
i
g
n
o
e
f
r
)
(
i
G
R
C
F
n
o
e
a
s
E
)
(
i
l
o
n
h
E
a
h
o
n
a
l
t
l
t
C
E
E
H
o
n
h
n
o
y
a
a
c
e
u
n
g
o
d
y
f
r
a
e
l
t
i
t
l
s
w
U
r
l
t
d
u
o
E
e
a
s
o
n
h
f
r
a
i
t
l
l
t
m
G
N
C
u
d
p
o
a
e
s
r
l
t
Error bars represent range of direct lifecycle emissions using different technologies,
feedstocks, and energy sources. Uncertainty of iLUC emissions are not shown, but are
much larger than uncertainties of direct emissions.
48

49. Issues with iLUC
How to handle this scientific uncertainty?? If we ignore it,
we are assigning a value of zero, which we know is
incorrect.
Controversial because this is first time a carbon value has
been assigned to land use changes
Next: beef and agriculture??
Corn ethanol interests are opposed to iLUC because it
makes corn ethanol less attractive.
Scientific uncertainty gives opponents (such as oil refiners)
an excuse to oppose it (for reasons other than self interest)
Better ways to handle iLUC?

50. Challenge 2. Leakage and Shuffling
Concern: Regulated parties export high-carbon fuels to non-
LCFS countries
Canada exports oil sands to China instead of using in US/Canada
Iowa sends high-carbon ethanol to Canada
Thus, no net benefit?
Questions for discussion:
How likely are these concerns to occur? What are the
magnitude of the impacts?
What if carbon policies are implemented in EU and Canada?
Is concern for leakage and shuffling a legitimate reason for
doing nothing?
50

51. Challenge 3. Energy Security
LCFS responds to climate goals (by reducing GHGs), but more
mixed effect on energy security
Encourages use of alt fuels and thus increases energy security
But also discourages production of fuels from oil sands, heavy oil, oil
shale, and coal
How to adjust LCFS to be responsive to energy security?
Reduce target
Other?
Note 1: LCFS does not ban oil sands (which has ~15% higher GHGs on lifecycle
basis than gasoline from oil).
Note 2: LCFS encourages more efficient production of oil sands, and use of lower
carbon process energy (nuclear energy? CCS?)
51

52. Challenge 4. “Sustainability” of Fuels
Many environmental and social impacts:
Food vs fuel: increased demand for SOME biofuels puts
pressure on food prices
Water: many fuel processes use large amounts of water
Encourages use of land including forests and “degraded
lands”?
Encourages deforestation, harms indigenous people (in Asia, Brazil)
Many (especially the EU, NGOs, and industry groups) are working
on “sustainability standards”
1/12/2009 52

53. Integration with National RFS?
40 National Renewable Fuel Standard Requirement 96
35
95
30
94
25
M
2e
J
)
/
20 93
15
G
B
n
o
92
s
a
O
l
i
C
A
g
F
(
I
10
91
Equivalent to LCFS target of
5
5% reduction by 2022
0 90
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Conventional biofuel Cellulosic biofuel Biomass based biodiesel
Other advanced biofuel AFCI
Phase out RFS and replace with LCFS (as proposed in
early Waxman-Markey bill), but do it sooner than 2023
Convert assigned GHG requirements for each RFS fuel
category into LCFS format 53

54. My piggy bank after I bought gasoline this morning...

55. LCFS Summary
LCFS appears to be most effective policy for orchestrating
transition to low carbon fuels
Includes all fuels and is fuel neutral
Performance standard
Relies on market forces
Durable framework for reducing long-term GHG emissions for transport
Transforming US RFS into a federal LCFS would provide
additional flexibility and incentives for innovation
LCFS adopted in California before opposing political interests
were fully marshalled
Political opposition is strong
discomfort with iLUC (and makes it more difficult to meet targets)
some conflicts with energy security,
corn ethanol companies and oil refiners don’t like it
Enviros concerned about “sustainability” impacts
55

56. Conclusions
• Many associated problems with the prevailing petroleum-
based transportation system:
– Economic costs
– Environmental costs
• Alternative fuel vehicle technologies offer…
– Promising solutions in terms of reductions in air quality
emissions, greenhouse emissions, petroleum use, overall energy
use
– Trade-offs in vehicle and fuel attributes (vehicle cost, fuel cost,
vehicle performance, consumer acceptability, resource
availability, driving range, refueling station availability)
• Policies to orchestrate the transition are controversial. LCFS
is best policy option?
It won’t be easy!!

57. Extra slides

58. Dif ficulty of Transitioning to most
pr omising alter native fuels
Sperling and Gordon, 2009
58

59. Proved Reserves
Source: Greene, “Low Carbon Transportation”, ARB Chairs Lecture, 2012