Representatives of European Union member states will meet on Friday (29 November) to discuss a compromise proposal on limiting the use of so-called ‘first-generation’ biofuel that it is claimed causes indirect land-use change (ILUC) and food shortages.

The new text, seen by European Voice, appears designed to win over sceptical member states by making it easier for them to meet requirements for renewable transport fuel. Last week (19 November), the Council text was watered down significantly from the European Commission’s original proposal, removing a requirement that takes into account ILUC factors.

The new compromise submitted yesterday, drawn up by Lithuania, which holds the presidency of the Council of Ministers, would greatly expand the list of feed-stocks that can count double toward meeting the EU’s target of sourcing 10% of transport fuel from renewable sources by 2020. These feed-stocks are plentiful in countries that were resisting efforts to water down the ILUC proposal, including the UK, Germany and Nordic countries.

“Member states are being bought off with extensions of double counting,” said one diplomatic source.

The UK and Germany were both strong supporters of the Commission’s original proposal to make sure only a maximum of half of the 10% target could be met using first-generation biofuel, with the remaining coming from advanced biofuel that does not cause ILUC.

But the UK is likely to have difficulty meeting this target and may support the Lithuanian presidency’s proposal to raise this threshold from 5% to 7% in exchange for an increase in the types of feed-stocks that can be double-counted. Although the idea for the 5% cap originated from Berlin, Germany has since done a U-turn and now states no preference for the cap.

Italy, which has insisted on maintaining a proposed 2.5% minimum requirement for advanced biofuel (which is scrapped in the draft Council position), may soften its stance if the text makes the renewable target easier to reach. Germany could be convinced by the addition of bio-waste to the list. Finland and Sweden are likely to be pleased with the addition of biomass from forests.

Denmark, Belgium, Luxembourg and the Netherlands are still opposed to weakening the text and will vote against the presidency’s proposal. Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic are sceptical of the existence of ILUC and would prefer no cap at all. France firmly supports efforts to increase the cap. France’s agriculture minister, Stephanie Le Foll, has taken charge of the issue and is sidelining his country’s energy and environment ministers, according to sources.

The ‘double-counting’ additions in the latest text have angered both environmental campaigners and large parts of the biofuel industry. “It is becoming an increasingly complex and impossible to implement piece of legislation,”said Emmanuel Desplechin, director for energy and environment at ethanol company ePure. “The inclusion of several multipliers can only be interpreted as a quick fix to achieve targets merely on paper with the additional effect of more fossil fuel being used. As a result, not only will it fail to secure existing investments, it will also not generate any new investments in Europe.”

Marc Oliver Herman, of campaign group Oxfam, said that what is being proposed would do nothing to solve the EU’s ailing biofuel policy.

No mandate for Parliament

If the watered-down Council position is given the support of energy ministers on 12 December, the European Parliament may have no choice but to back this position even though MEPs voted to strengthen the Commission proposal in September.

Following that vote, centre-right MEPs refused to give their consent to French liberal MEP Corinne Lepage, who is guiding the legislation through the Parliament, to conduct negotiations with the member states. Without a negotiating mandate, Lepage must take the file into a second reading. The Parliament will have four months from 12 December to amend, approve or reject the member states’ position. If MEPs opt to maintain their original stance, the subject will then go into conciliation – a process that will surely last longer than the term of the current Parliament, which ends in April 2014.

MEPs will have to choose between accepting the Council’s position or risking the revision of EU biofuel rules falling apart in the hands of a new group of MEPs.

Click Here: Golf special