Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Certification of the Sustainability of Biofuels in Global Supply Chains

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Certification – Trust, Accountability, Liability

Part of the book series: Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation ((SEELR,volume 16))

Abstract

The promotion of biofuels in the EU aims at the substitution of fossil fuels and the reduction of carbon emissions. Therefore, the Renewable Energy Directive 2009/28/EC obliges EU Member States to make sure that until 2020 in transport at least 10% of the final energy consumption is derived from renewable sources or that at least a 6% greenhouse gas emission reduction is achieved. In order to safeguard that the production of biomass does not result in negative impacts on greenhouse gas stocks or on biodiversity, the promotion of biofuels and bioliquids is accompanied by sustainability requirements.

As the majority of biomass for biofuels is produced in the ‘Global South’ with often low regulatory and enforcement capacity, compliance with the sustainability requirements shall be ensured through a complex certification set-up based upon private certification systems and private certification bodies which thereby replace, to a certain extent, the regulatory and administrative role of the State. This chapter analyses that system of control and its weaknesses with regard to the sustainable production of biofuels.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    [2009] OJ L 140/16.

  2. 2.

    Calculation methods are laid down in Art. 19 of Dir 2009/28/EC.

  3. 3.

    For a more detailed description see Romppanen (2015), pp. 46 ff.

  4. 4.

    See Ponte and Daugbjerg (2015), pp. 96 ff.

  5. 5.

    See European Commission, Technical assessment of the EU biofuels sustainability and feasibility of 10% renewable energy in transport, SWD (2015) 117 final, 3.

  6. 6.

    See recital (74) of Dir 2009/28/EC.

  7. 7.

    See also Ponte and Daugbjerg (2015), p. 96.

  8. 8.

    See the Commission proposal for a Directive on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, COM(2008) 19 final, 8; Romppanen (2015), 48.

  9. 9.

    See Romppanen (2012), pp. 173 and 176 ff. See also the European Commission’s Staff Working Document accompanying the Renewable Energy Progress Report of 27/3/2013, SWD(2013) 102 final, 17 f.

  10. 10.

    For a description of the Finnish system, see Romppanen (2013), pp. 340 and 344 ff.

  11. 11.

    Verwaltungsvorschrift für die Anerkennung von Zertifizierungssystemen und Zertifizierungsstellen nach der Biokraftstoff-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung (Biokraft-NachVwV) of 12/3/2010, as amended.

  12. 12.

    Verwaltungsvorschrift für die Anerkennung von Zertifizierungssystemen und Zertifizierungsstellen nach der Biomassestrom-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung (BioSt-NachVwV) of 10/12/2009, as amended.

  13. 13.

    See also Müller (2011), p. 405.

  14. 14.

    International Sustainability and Carbon Certification (ISCC) and REDcert.

  15. 15.

    For the list, see https://www.ble.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Klima-Energie/Nachhaltige-Biomasseherstellung/Anerkennung_de.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=13.

  16. 16.

    For critique, see Romppanen (2015), 111 ff.

  17. 17.

    See only https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundtable_on_Sustainable_Palm_Oil. For more detailed information, see the German Wikipedia page at https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundtable_on_Sustainable_Palm_Oil.

  18. 18.

    See https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/voluntary_schemes_overview_dec17.pdf.

  19. 19.

    For the following, see also Hamelmann (2016), pp. 30 ff.; Naiki (2016), pp. 129 and 138 ff.

  20. 20.

    See the overview of voluntary schemes at https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/voluntary_schemes_overview_dec17.pdf.

  21. 21.

    E.g., the Gafta Trade Assurance Scheme.

  22. 22.

    European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 27.

  23. 23.

    See also Hamelmann (2016), pp. 37 ff., for a comparison of the multi-stakeholder schemes of ISCC and Roundtable on Sustainable Biomaterials EU RED with the Red Bioenergy Sustainability Assurance (RSBA) scheme that was developed by the Abengoa Bioenergy company.

  24. 24.

    See n 22.

  25. 25.

    See also infra, Sect. 6.

  26. 26.

    See, for example, Bowyer (2010).

  27. 27.

    See, for example, van Dam et al. (2010), pp. 2445 and 2460 ff.

  28. 28.

    See European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 35.

  29. 29.

    See, for example, IPC and Renewable Energy International Law (2006); Switzer and McMahon (2011), p. 713; Lydgate (2013), pp. 159 ff. For the relationship of private or voluntary schemes and WTO law, see also Glinski (2017), p. 120, in particular 138 ff.

  30. 30.

    See WT/DS443 European Union and a Member State – Certain Measures Concerning the Importation of Biodiesel; WT/DS459 European Union and certain Member States – Certain Measures on the Importation and Marketing of Biodiesel and Measures Supporting the Biodiesel Industry – Request for consultations by Argentina.

  31. 31.

    See also Schmeichel (2014), pp. 174 ff.; van Dam et al. (2010), pp. 2445 and 2460 ff.

  32. 32.

    See Ugarte et al. (2013). In contrast, Germany was the first Member State to implement the certification system of Directive 2009/28/EC and has recognised two certification systems already in 2010, see BLE (2011), p. 10.

  33. 33.

    See, for example, European Commission, Communication on voluntary schemes and default values in the EU biofuels and bioliquids sustainability schemes, [2010] OJ C 160/1; Commission, Communication on the practical implementation of the EU biofuels and bioliquids sustainability scheme and on counting rules for biofuels, [2010] OJ C 160/8. See also Romppanen (2012), pp. 177 ff.

  34. 34.

    See Council Reg (EU) No 1307/2014 on defining the criteria and geographic ranges of highly biodiverse grassland for the purposes of Art 7b(3)(c) of Dir 98/70/EC relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels and Art 17(3)(c) of Dir 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, [2014] OJ L 351/3.

  35. 35.

    For critique, see the European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 26.

  36. 36.

    For critique, see Romppanen (2015), p. 91.

  37. 37.

    European Commission note on ‘Verification of the chain of custody of biofuels made from waste and processing residues’ (10.10.2014); available at https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/2014_letter_wastes_residues.pdf.

  38. 38.

    European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 25. See also infra, Sect. 3.4.

  39. 39.

    For details, see Schmeichel (2014), pp. 167 ff.

  40. 40.

    See Schmeichel (2014), pp. 167 f.

  41. 41.

    With the positive exception, in particular, of RSB.

  42. 42.

    See also Schmeichel (2014), pp. 169 f.

  43. 43.

    Ibid., 169 f, 175.

  44. 44.

    See also ibid., 171.

  45. 45.

    See European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 21.

  46. 46.

    See Schmeichel (2014), p. 172.

  47. 47.

    [2011] OJ L 55/13. See also Art 13(1)(a) of Reg (EU) 182/2011.

  48. 48.

    See EGC, Case T-278/11 Client Earth et al v Commission, ECLI:EU:T:2012:593; see also Schmeichel (2014), p. 134.

  49. 49.

    Commission, Communication on voluntary Schemes and default values in the EU biofuels and bioliquids sustainability schemes, [2010] OJ C 160/1.

  50. 50.

    Ibid., para 2.2.3.

  51. 51.

    Ibid., para 2.2.2.

  52. 52.

    European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 25.

  53. 53.

    European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 20.

  54. 54.

    Commission, Communication on voluntary Schemes and default values in the EU biofuels and bioliquids sustainability schemes, [2010] OJ C 160/1, para 2.2.2.

  55. 55.

    For critique, see Romppanen (2015), p. 49.

  56. 56.

    See e.g. Schmeichel (2014), pp. 136 f.

  57. 57.

    See the Staff Working Document (2013), 17.

  58. 58.

    In fact, the German participants in the Committee on the Sustainability of Biofuels and Bioliquids explicitly suggested that monitoring of the voluntary systems should be one of the tasks of the Committee, which, however, was not regarded as necessary. See the summary report of the meeting of the Committee on the Sustainability of Biofuels and Bioliquids of 27 May 2011, quoted by Schmeichel (2014), p. 136.

  59. 59.

    European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 29.

  60. 60.

    Ibid., 28.

  61. 61.

    Ibid., 29.

  62. 62.

    Available at https://ec.europa.eu/energy/sites/ener/files/documents/PAM%20to%20vs%20on%20transparency%20ARES%202015%201094930.pdf.

  63. 63.

    See European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 30.

  64. 64.

    See, e.g., Schmeichel (2014), p. 135.

  65. 65.

    European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 8.

  66. 66.

    See BLE (2017), p. 15.

  67. 67.

    Ibid., 23.

  68. 68.

    European Court of Auditors (2016), pp. 20 f.; hereby the audit team indicates that infringements by farmers of EU environmental law are frequent; which indicates that the controls carried out by national authorities may be insufficient.

  69. 69.

    See also Hamelmann (2016), p. 45.

  70. 70.

    On the possibility of such ‘scheme shopping’, see European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 32.

  71. 71.

    ISCC and REDcert, see BLE (2011), p. 10.

  72. 72.

    Ibid., 13.

  73. 73.

    BLE (2012), p. 18.

  74. 74.

    See also the critique of the audit team of the European Court of Auditors (2016), p. 30.

  75. 75.

    In the UK and the Netherlands, national systems had been established by that time as well, see BLE (2012), p. 18.

  76. 76.

    See BLE (2013), pp. 17 and 20.

  77. 77.

    See BLE (2014), pp. 17 ff.

  78. 78.

    BLE (2015), p. 19.

  79. 79.

    See BLE (2017), p. 21.

  80. 80.

    [2015] OJ L 239/1.

  81. 81.

    Impact Assessment accompanying the proposal for a Directive amending Directive 98/70/EC relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels and amending Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, SWD(2012) 343 final.

  82. 82.

    See recital (5) of Dir (EU) 2015/1513.

  83. 83.

    Proposal for a Directive on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources (recast), COM(2016) 767 final.

  84. 84.

    European Parliament doc. P8_TA-PROV(2018)0009 of 17/1/2018, Amendment 307 on Art 7(1) subpara 4 of the Commission proposal.

  85. 85.

    European Parliament doc. A8-0066/2017.

  86. 86.

    See recital (81) and Art 27(3) of the proposal.

  87. 87.

    See also Schmeichel (2014), pp. 174 ff.

References

  • BLE. (2011). Biomassestrom-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Biokraftstoff-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Evaluations- und Erfahrungsbericht für das Jahr 2010. Bonn, Germany: Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung.

    Google Scholar 

  • BLE. (2012). Biomassestrom-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Biokraftstoff-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Evaluations- und Erfahrungsbericht für das Jahr 2011. Bonn, Germany: Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung.

    Google Scholar 

  • BLE. (2013). Biomassestrom-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Biokraftstoff-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Evaluations- und Erfahrungsbericht für das Jahr 2012. Bonn, Germany: Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung.

    Google Scholar 

  • BLE. (2014). Biomassestrom-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Biokraftstoff-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Evaluations- und Erfahrungsbericht für das Jahr 2013. Bonn, Germany: Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung.

    Google Scholar 

  • BLE. (2015). Biomassestrom-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Biokraftstoff-Nachhaltigkeitsverordnung, Evaluations- und Erfahrungsbericht für das Jahr 2014. Bonn, Germany: Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung.

    Google Scholar 

  • BLE. (2017). Evaluation and Progress Report 2016. Bonn, Germany: Bundesanstalt für Landwirtschaft und Ernährung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowyer, C. (2010). Anticipated indirect land use change associated with expanded use of biofuels and bioliquids in the EU – An analysis of the national renewable energy action plans. https://ieep.eu/publications/climate-change-and-energy/energy/anticipated-indirect-land-use-change-associated-with-expanded-use-of-biofuels-and-bioliquids-in-the

  • European Court of Auditors. (2016). The EU system for the certification of sustainable biofuels. Special Report 18/2016, Luxembourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glinski, C. (2017). CSR and the law of the WTO – The impact of Tuna Dolphin II and EC–Seal Products. Nordic Journal of Commercial Law, 120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamelmann, J. (2016). Certification of biofuels within the Directive 2009/28/EC: A comparative analysis of certification schemes. Bachelor thesis, University of Twente.

    Google Scholar 

  • IPC and Renewable Energy International Law. (2006). WTO disciplines and biofuels: Opportunities and constraints in the creation of a global marketplace. http://www.agritrade.org/Publications/wto_biofuels.html

  • Lydgate, E. B. (2013). The EU, the WTO and indirect land-use change. Journal of World Trade, 47, 159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Müller, D. (2011). Die Umsetzung der europäischen Nachhaltigkeitsstandards für die Nutzung von Bioenergie in Deutschland. Zeitschrift für Umweltrecht, 405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Naiki, Y. (2016). Trade and bioenergy: Explaining and assessing the regime complex for sustainable bioenergy. European Journal of International Law, 27, 129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ponte, S., & Daugbjerg, C. (2015). Biofuel sustainability and the formation of transnational hybrid governance. Environmental Policy, 24, 96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romppanen, S. (2012). The EU’s biofuels: Certified as sustainable? Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review, 173.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romppanen, S. (2013). The role and relevance of private actors in EU biofuel governance. Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law, 22, 340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romppanen, S. (2015). New governance in context: Evaluating the EU biofuels regime. Dissertation, University of Eastern Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmeichel, A. (2014). Towards sustainability of biomass importation – An assessment of the EU renewable energy directive. Groningen, The Netherlands: Europa Law Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Switzer, S., & McMahon, J. (2011). EU biofuels policy – Raising the question of WTO compatibility. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 60, 713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ugarte, S., van Dam, J., & Spijkers, S. (2013). Recognition of private certification schemes for public regulation – Lessons learned from the renewable energy directive. Deutsche Gesellschaft für internationale Zusammenarbeit.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Dam, J., Junginger, M., & Faaij, A. P. C. (2010). From the global efforts on certification of bioenergy towards an integrated approach based on sustainable land use planning. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2445.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Private Governance (CEVIA), Faculty of Law, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Carola Glinski

Authors
  1. Carola Glinski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carola Glinski .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Kassel , Kassel, Germany

    Peter Rott

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Glinski, C. (2019). Certification of the Sustainability of Biofuels in Global Supply Chains. In: Rott, P. (eds) Certification – Trust, Accountability, Liability. Studies in European Economic Law and Regulation, vol 16. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02499-4_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02499-4_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-02498-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-02499-4

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation