In 1990, the UK government published its first white paper on sustainability, fol­lowed by, in 1999, a paper, A Better Quality of Life. More recently the Department of Trade & Industry (DTI) produced a white paper, Our Energy Future — Creating a Low Carbon Economy in 2003 in which there was an aim to reduce greenhouse emis­sions by 60% by 2050 compared with the 1990 value.

As part of the measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, the UK has intro­duced a major policy, the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO), formerly Non-Fossil Fuels Obligation, in response to the EU Biofuels Directive (2003/30/EC). The government has enacted the Renewable Obligation Order, under which 10% of electricity generation should come from renewables by 2010. Most of the renewable — produced electricity is expected to come from wind and co-firing with biomass. In the UK, 6.7% of the electricity should be generated from biomass by 2006/2007 and 15.4% by 2015/2016. The current schemes under the Renewable Obligation Order include the following:

• Any biomass, including imported coconut and olive waste, can be co-fired until March 2009.

• Of the total produced, 25% of co-fired biomass must be from energy crops from April 2009 until March 2010.

• Also, 50% of co-fired biomass must be from energy crops from April 2010 until March 2011.

• In addition, 75% of co-fired biomass must be from energy crops from April 2011 to March 2016.

• Co-firing ceases to be eligible for renewable obligation certificates (ROCs) after March 2016.

The most recent figures given for the UK are shown in Table 3.3 and Fig. 3.5, where the greenhouse gases are quoted as millions of tonnes of carbon. Emissions of carbon

	1 990	1 995	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006
Carbon dioxide	592.4	549.8	548.6	559.4	542.7	554.7	555.1	555.2	554.5
Methane	103.5	90.2	68.4	62.4	59.4	53.4	51.6	49.5	49.1
Nitrous oxide	63.8	53.0	43.6	41.5	40.1	39.8	40.6	39.8	38.3
CFCs and sulfur	13.8	17.2	11.7	11.5	11.7	11.8	10.3	10.6	10.4
hexafluoride
Kyoto GHG	770.8	709.0	671.4	674.4	653.8	659.5	657.9	655.5	652.3
basket3
Total allowing	770.8	709.0	671.4	674.4	653.8	659.5	657.9	628.4	619.0
for EU ETS
Change from	-1.2	-9.1	-13.9	-13.5	-16.2	-15.4	-15.6	-19.4	-20.6

Table 3.3. Emissions of greenhouse gases in the UK since 1990 in million of tonnes (Mt) of carbon. (Adapted from Defra, 2007.)

baseline

779.9

(%)

CO2 GHG

Fig. 3.5. UK greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide emissions. The greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride and allow for EU ETS in 2005 and 2006. (Redrawn from Defra, 2008.)

dioxide fell by 12% between 1990 and 2006, helped by emissions trading in 2005 and 2006 (EU ETS). The overall drop in greenhouse gases which include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and the chlorofluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride was 20.6% (Table 3.3) in 2006, well below that required by the Kyoto Protocol. The factors contributing to this reduction are given as less coal and oil used and more gas and renewables used, particularly to generate electricity (Defra, 2008).

The RTFO also sets levels of biofuels, bioethanol and biodiesel to be added to overall fuels sales with a final value of 5% by volume. The levels of obligation are given in Fig. 3.6 in terms of volume. If the energy content of the fuel is used, the add­ition represents 5.75% because of the lower energy content of biofuels. However, the levels of biofuel use in the UK have suffered some difficulties and are still low (Table 3.4). The UK Report to the European Commission quoted these difficulties as ‘the level of duty differential in the UK and the length of certainty the mechanism offers has proved insufficient to stimulate the level of investment in production capacity and infrastructure required to meet the Directive’s objectives’.

The development of biofuels and the effects of policy can be seen in the contrast­ing positions in the UK and Germany. The markets for biofuels have been compared for the UK and Germany in terms of the directives, policies and standards (Bomb et al., 2007). In 2002, the German government exempted all biofuels from excise tax until 2009 to encourage their adoption. Germany is now the largest producer of biodiesel in the EU, and after 2004 the excise duty was exempted for biodiesel blends. This has made biofuels competitive with fossil fuels in terms of cost. However, some groups in Germany have been critical of biofuels, including Friends of the Earth (Bomb et al., 2007). At present the market for 100% biodiesel has shifted to trucks, and automobile manufacturers are making efforts to provide warranties for 100% biodiesel and blends for cars. In 2004 no ethanol was produced in Germany and any used was imported from Brazil, but a number of ethanol plants are now under

Fig. 3.6. The level of obligation on the addition of biofuels to all fuels set by the UK in 2006. (Redrawn from UK Report to European Commission Article 4, Department of Transport, 2006.)

Table 3.4. UK biofuel sales in the UK for 2005. (From UK Report to European Commission Article 4, UK Department of Transport, 2006.) Fuel Sales in 2005 (million litres) % of total fuel sales % total of total fuel energy content Biodiesel 33 0.07% 0.06% Bioethanol 85 0.17% 0.12% Total 118 0.24% 0.18%

construction. Ethanol use in Germany has been encouraged with support of the farm sector, energy security and reduction in carbon dioxide emissions. Not only has there been an exemption of excise tax but additional factors such as set-aside premiums, partial state monopoly and price controls for agricultural products.

In contrast, in the UK, the excise tax on biodiesel was reduced in 2002 by £0.20 and ethanol by £0.20 in 2005. The excise tax still remained at £0.275 on both bio­fuels, which means that only biodiesel produced from used cooking oil is competitive in price with fossil fuels. However, production of biodiesel in the UK has increased and in 2008, 404,000 t of biodiesel from a variety of oil sources and 55,000 t of bioethanol from sugarbeet were produced.

The main driver for the introduction of biofuels in Germany has been the exemp­tion of excise tax, which was not implemented in the UK, and explains the differences in production in both countries. The tax concession is expected to end in 2009 in Germany and it will be interesting to see how biofuels will compete after this time. The result of the policies or the lack of policies in the two countries explains the contrasting adoption of biofuels, and the conclusions of a study of the two countries are as follows (Bomb et al., 2007):

• Consumers will buy fuel on price, rather than for green credentials.

• National government commitment for the establishment of a biofuel industry is required.

• Low-level blending is the easiest method of introducing biofuels, but sufficient volumes for anything more than 5% addition are not available.

• Niche markets are available for biofuels in areas of environmental sensitivity.

• Oil companies are more supportive of biodiesel than bioethanol.

• Environmental impacts and carbon balances vary between biofuels, and there have been some questions about bioethanol.

• A fuel certification system is needed for sustainability and fuel composition.

• Support for biodiesel and bioethanol does not stop other technologies from being developed.