Fuel carbon intensity standards may not mitigate climate change

• Published in: Energy policy Vol. 105; pp. 93 - 97
• Main Authors: Plevin, Richard J., Delucchi, Mark A., O’Hare, Michael
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Kidlington Elsevier Ltd 01.06.2017; Elsevier Science Ltd
• Subjects: Carbon; Climate; Climate change; Climate change mitigation; Climate effects; Climate models; Consequential LCA; Emissions; Emissions control; Energy policy; Environmental policy; Environmental regulations; Fuels; Global marketing; Greenhouse effect; Greenhouse gases; Life cycle assessment; Life cycle engineering; Life cycles; Low-carbon fuel standard; Markets; Mitigation; Modeling; Projections; Regulation; Regulations; States; Taxation; Transportation; Values; Canada; United States > US; Europe; Life cycle assessment; Low-carbon fuel standard; Climate change; Consequential LCA; Modeling
• ISSN: 0301-4215; 1873-6777
• DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2017.02.037

To mitigate the climate change effects of transportation, the US states of California and Oregon, the Canadian province of British Columbia, and the European Union have implemented regulations to reduce the life cycle greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity of transport fuel, commonly referred to as "carbon intensity", or CI. In this article, we unpack the theory and practice of fuel CI standards, examining claims regarding climate-change mitigation. We show that these standards do not reliably mitigate climate change because estimates of GHG reductions rely primarily on models that are not designed to estimate changes in emissions and climate impacts. Some regulations incorporate models that estimate a subset of changes in emissions, but the models must project changes in global markets over decades, and there is little agreement about the best model structure or parameter values. Since multiple models and projections may be equally plausible, fuel CI is inevitably subjective and unverifiable. We conclude that regulating or taxing observable emissions would more reliably achieve emission reduction. •Use of fuel carbon intensity (CI) standards has been expanding recently.•Fuel CI ratings are subjective, scenario- and model-dependent.•Uncertainty in fuel CI ratings creates uncertainty in policy outcomes.•There is no reliable test of whether fuel CI standards mitigate climate change.•Regulating or taxing observable emissions would be a more reliable approach.