Abstract
The US Renewable Fuel Standard contains a policy bias that undermines the three-broad policy goals of rural development, energy security, and greenhouse gas reductions. This policy bias, wherein a narrow range of options is expected to address broad societal objectives, contributes to a persistence of first-generation biofuels and limits technical variation. Renewable fuel content requirements have helped to expand the use of ethanol and biodiesel in the short term. However, long-term changes will require greater technological variation to stimulate innovation for the development of sustainable renewable fuel pathways.
Acknowledgements
This work is based on the author's dissertation, and special thanks is due to James Meadowcroft at Carleton University. This article was significantly improved with input from two anonymous reviewers, whose critique proves the utility and value of peer review.
Notes on contributor
Jeffery Cottes is the senior legislative analyst with Energy Division, Department of Innovation, Energy and Mines, Province of Manitoba and Adjunct Professor with the University of Winnipeg. He began his research on socio-technical transitions, transportation biofuels, and sustainable energy during his PhD studies at the School of Public Policy and Administration, Carleton University, and applies this approach to his work in the public sector.
Notes
1. The offset of these costs with public resources follows the precedent set by other major energy sectors, including coal, oil and gas, nuclear, and large-scale hydroelectric.
2. ‘Incremental’ and ‘Radical’ changes are two of four types of innovation identified by Freeman and Perez. The other two are ‘New Technology Systems’ and ‘Techno-economic Paradigms’ and have since been subject to significant reformulation.
3. Greenhouse gas emissions reductions are specified in EISA and are measured against the 2005 baseline emissions of gasoline and petroleum diesel fuel.