OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON EU'S APPROACH TO

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BRUSSELS 000936 SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ECON EIND ENRG EUN EWWT KGHG SENV TPHY TRGY TSPL SUBJECT: OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON EU'S APPROACH TO INDIRECT LAND USE CHANGE FOR BIOFUELS This is an action request. Please see paragraph 6. ¶1. (SBU) Summary. The European Commission currently is internally debating how to address the effects of indirect land use change (ILUC) on the greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels. To assist in the process, the Commission has released a list of eight possible approaches and has opened up a public comment period through July 31. The Commission has invited the United States to participate in a third country informational session on July 14 in Brussels as part of this process. USEU notes the many positive benefits to engagement and invites USG agencies to participate in the July 14 session and to submit a response to the call for public comments. End summary. -------------- BACKGROUND -------------- ¶2. (SBU) As part of the EU's Renewables Directive agreed to in December 2008, the EU Commission was tasked with addressing the effects of indirect land use change (ILUC) on the life-cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from biofuels. The text of the Directive left the topic intentionally vague, allowing the Commission to submit a proposal for the method it found best addresses the issue. Co-lead on the assessment was given to the DG for Energy and Transport (DG TREN),which wrote the original text of the Renewables Directive and intentionally left out ILUC, and the DG for Environment, which pressed strongest in the Commission for the inclusion of ILUC. This stark division remains, along with concerns from several other DGs, including Agriculture and Trade, and as a result, the Commission has only arrived at a potential list of eight approaches, ranging from do nothing to adding an ILUC factor in all GHG calculations. The Commission, in order to meet its June 2010 deadline for a proposal, arranged a public comment period and informational sessions to seek input from EU Member States, industry and other stakeholders, and certain third countries. -------------- -------------- Eight (really six) approaches for addressing ILUC -------------- -------------- ¶3. (SBU) As part of the invitation to the informational session, the Commission attached a summary of the possible approaches to address ILUC. (Note: Please contact the USEU POC listed in paragraph 6 for the full preparatory draft. End note.) While there are eight listed, in reality, only six involve Commission ideas, as one says to "do nothing," and another asks respondents for ideas the Commission has not yet considered. The other six are: -- Extend to other countries the restrictions on land use change that will be imposed on biofuels consumed in the EU. Through working with other governments, the Commission would aim to encourage all biofuels consumers to adopt identical restrictions on biofuels feed stock land use. -- Work through international organizations to develop and implement international agreements to protect carbon rich habitats such as tropical rain forests. -- Increase the minimum required threshold for greenhouse gas savings. The current threshold is 35% life-cycle improvement over fossil fuels, increasing in 2017 to 50% for existing installations and 60% for new installations. -- Extend the use of bonuses to the most environmentally friendly biofuels. The current scheme allows for a bonus of approximately 35% for the use of severely degraded or heavily contaminated land. -- Create additional sustainability requirements for biofuels from crops/regions where production is liable to lead to a high level of damaging land use change. -- Include an ILUC factor in GHG calculations for biofuels. There are several proposed approaches to this method, but all of them include adding a consistent factor to the life-cycle GHG emissions of biofuels. ¶4. (SBU) The range of possible options represents the strong divergences that continue to exist within the Commission. A DG Environment Official explained to USEU EconOff that DG Environment is most supportive of adding an ILUC factor. By contrast, DG TREN is likely to support one of the less BRUSSELS 00000936 002 OF 002 intrusive options, possibly even to include doing nothing. However, DG TREN's position is not entirely clear, as the weekly Commission inter-service (comparable to USG inter-agency) meetings have focused exclusively on attacking and defending the concept of an ILUC factor. To emphasize the divisions, while most Commission officials would like to respond to the public comment period offered in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for the EPA's Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2),the Commission is unable to submit a single coordinated response. Instead, several have indicated that they plan to submit technical comments and questions as individuals not representing the Commission. -------------- COMMENT -------------- ¶5. (SBU) This is an excellent opportunity for U.S. agencies to engage constructively in the EU's process, particularly given the early stage at which EU experts appear to be on ILUC. Post invites U.S. agencies to send experts to Brussels to participate in the July 14 informational session and to send a submission in response to the call for comments. Such engagement supports overarching U.S. policy to minimize transatlantic divergences in regulation, particularly those that could negatively impact global trade. Both Post and the Commission are cognizant of and sensitive to the discussions currently taking place in Congress, notably the potential amendments to the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) as passed by the House in the American Clean Energy and Security Act in June. However, Post notes that technical experts in U.S. agencies are well beyond counterparts in the Commission, and the United States can contribute significantly to the technical understanding by Commission experts. Even if the response is limited to non policy-prescriptive items such as technical questions, inquiries, or comments directed at the various proposed methods, the United States can leverage experience gained through the development and Administration release of the RFS2 proposal to affect Commission decision making. Both DGs TREN and Environment are supportive of a U.S. response, and USEU believes this presents the opportunity to influence the EU's process and direct the conversation. End comment. ¶6. (SBU) ACTION REQUEST: Post recognizes the short lead time for sending officials to the informational session. USEU will in any event be in attendance at the session. In lieu of travel, Post welcomes talking points or questions to be raised either during the session or on the margins. For further information, to include requesting the full Commission preparatory draft, or to inform USEU of travel and attendance at the informational session, please contact USEU Officer Rob Dollinger at DollingerRA@state.gov or 32-2-508-2637. MURRAY .