02/02/23 10:03:03
@PD @lecture @biofuels @ch7003
- Asking vague questions to the class, great.
- Putting numbers to, is this biofuel worth it?
- Done through life cycle assessment.
- Define the scope, what level of detail are you going to do.
- Inventory analysis, trying to put numbers on inputs on outputs (challenging). May be able to work out but also have to
estimate.
- For instance, cultivation, do you know precisely what goes in and out of growing a crop?
- Impact assessment.
- Alls the above are feeding into interpretation of life cycle assessment. If you find that you’re limited in inventory area, might go back and change scope (because of lack of information etc.).
- Serves to relate science to politics.
- RED and FQD set out targets that must be hit, so presumably, playing a major role in the life cycle assessment.
- Or, actually, lfa are used to develop these targets.
- These directives don’t take into account land use changes (maybe newer versions will).
- RED 2 is hoping to address these issues with LUC. RED tried to kind of push biofuels at any cost, which translated to 1st generation biofuels.
- RED 2 looks at independent LUC. In this sense it’s geared towards 2nd/3rd generation biofuels.
- Acceptable renewables (that transport must have some percentage of) are listed in ‘excruciating’ detail in Annexes.
- Advanced biofuels (non food sources) given a higher weighting or contribution. Addressing LUC shortcomings from before.
- There’s a cap too on specific biofuels. In trying to specifically direct efforts.
- Can’t report targets as firms see fit. Need to use the provided life-cycle methodology.