U.S. Government
International
Academic, Non-Governmental
A high-stakes legal battle is underway in California over whether the state's clean air agency can enforce a first-ever rule to slash carbon emissions in transportation fuels. The fight is being closely watched because the rule could choke global market demand for Alberta's carbon-intensive oil sands at a very precarious time for the industry.
On Wednesday, the Obama administration rejected a permit for the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which could have increased imports of the fuel into the U.S. by up to 830,000 barrels a day. It was a major setback for the oil industry and its allies and an unexpected victory for environmentalists and their allies. The two sides are now facing each other down in this court case.
California's low-carbon fuel standard is the world's first attempt to require oil suppliers to slash the carbon footprint of their motor fuels, measured not just by emissions from tailpipes but across their full lifecycle, from extraction to combustion. Eleven Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states, and the European Union, are closely tracking California's case because they are working to adopt similar rules.
The state's influential Air Resources Board, or CARB, adopted the Low Carbon Fuel Standard in 2009 as part of its landmark global warming law, A.B. 32. The agency was supposed to begin enforcing the rule on Jan. 1, 2012. But oil companies, which say it unfairly penalizes high-carbon fuels like oil sands crude, have fought furiously to kill the standard. And on Dec. 29, a federal judge in Fresno, Calif., handed them a victory by ruling that CARB can't enforce the measure until an outstanding lawsuit by the oil industry and ethanol advocates is resolved in 2013.
The judge, Lawrence J. O'Neill, a Pres. George W. Bush appointee, said the rule unconstitutionally discriminates against out-of-state fuel sources and regulates commercial activity outside California's borders.
A week later, CARB appealed O'Neill's decision and asked a federal court in San Francisco to reverse it. An agency spokesperson told InsideClimate News this week that CARB will request a stay of the injunction "very shortly" as it awaits a decision on the appeal. National environmental groups Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and the Conservation Law Foundation are providing legal help to CARB. (Editor's note: On Friday, Jan. 20, CARB filed a motion with Judge O'Neill to stay the injunction on the LCFS, which the judge rejected on Jan 23.)
Both sides are playing for huge stakes.If CARB and the conservationists win the appeal, the agency can immediately mandate that oil importers, refiners and fuel blenders meet the target they've set for 2012—to cut the "carbon intensity" of their fuel mix by a quarter of one percent. (The policy calls for a 10 percent reduction by 2020.)
That could send a signal to other states and countries that are waiting on California to follow suit. For months, EU states have been locked in their own battle over whether to implement the EU Fuel Quality Directive that labels fuel imports from the oil sands as "dirty," with Canada accused of heavy lobbying to delay action.
Ethanol's Carbon Footprint
Everyone knows ethanol is net energy negative, and net carbon positive over fossil fuels, and that's not considering the global deforestation 'carbon volcanoes', as other countries rush to displace indigenous peoples from their land-holdings, and clear-cut old growth forests for the 'renewable energy' GMO corn market. Personally, I don't think we can do anything to stop the Albertans from turning their province into a moonscape, but we sure as heck owe the billions of campesanos clinging to their coconut palm taro patch the human decency not to subsidize ethanol production, when we can buy all the sugar-ethanol we need from Brazil right next door ... and now you have to put on your 'big picture' hat, ... with Brazil producing sugar-ethanol in the billions of gallons, and about to develop a 'Saudi West' oil reserves, what arcane behind-the-scenes manipulation got EPA off its dead duff, to shut down Brazil's orange juice imports.
WE ARE OWNED! CATTLE!!
@WorkinMan The Canadian Oil
@WorkinMan The Canadian Oil won't decrease the prices of the gasoline. There is a market principle. The more the use, the higher the price!
So, the only market way to reduce gasoline price is to reduce oil consumption. Keystone XL makes exactly the opposite. The pipeline increases the oil consumption.
You won't see cheap gas at all !!!
Oil sands
If California is serious about this, they won't mind if the Canadians make an arrangement to move the refinery in California to Canada. the latest oil policy is totally irrational not taking the Chinese into account. All that this will do is make our oil that we use more expensive, and force our best trading partner into the hands of our worst potential enemy. I am all for alternate energies but we must use what's available wisely, and save our funds for development of those alternate energies. read Red Alert by Stephen Leeb, and you will understand where I'm coming from.
Leeb is on the board of
Leeb is on the board of several mining and energy companies, he couldn't be more conflicted if he ran a brokerage, oh, wait, he does.
Post new comment