Newman Ethanol Policy and Trade Biofuels International 14 Ghent_final

8/10/2019 Newman Ethanol Policy and Trade Biofuels International 14 Ghent_final

1/55

U.S. Ethanol Policy and Trade

Biofuels International Conference

GhentSeptember 24, 2014

Doug Newman

International Trade Analyst

U.S. International Trade Commission

500 E St. SW

Washington, DC 20436

202-205-3328

[email protected]
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/55

The analysis and views expressed in this presentation are solely

those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the

U.S. International Trade Commission or any other U.S.

government agency.

Disclaimer


3/55

U.S. International Trade Commission

Independent, quasi-judicial federal agency

Investigates and studies trade issues Section 332 (Probable effects; Competit iveness)

Title VII (AD, CVD) Section 337 (IP)

Advisory U.S. Trade Representative

Senate Finance; House Ways and Means

Publishes the Harmonized Tarif f Schedules

Determined CBI ethanol dehydration quota


4/55

Major Points

Global policies affect trade flows

Major U.S. policy changes occurred in recent years

U.S. policy is under review

Uncertainty and risk continue

Exports have increased in importance to U.S. producers


5/55

Topics Global overview

U.S. market

Policy elements and changes

Implications for U.S. trade


6/55

Global Overview


7/55

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Billion

gallons

Fuel Other (beverage, industrial)

Source: Estimated based on data from LMC International.

Note: Data for 2014 are pro jected.

Global ethanol production growth, driven by fuel use, levels off in 2011


8/55

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Milliongal

lons

US Brazil EU China All other

Source: BEA; EIA; FAS; MAPA; Eurostat; LMC International.


US and Brazil dominate global ethanol production, but others emerge


9/55

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Milliongall

ons

US Brazil EU China All other

Source: BEA; EIA; FAS; MAPA; Eurostat; LMC International.


Growth in global fuel ethanol consumption slows: major markets mature and face

constraints, new markets relatively small


10/55

Global ethanol imports generally rise and diversify during 2003-2013

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Milliongallons

USA EU Canada Japan Central America Brazil All other

Source: GTIS; LMC International.

Note: Includes all ethanol in HS heading 2207. Quantities include denaturants. EU impor ts understated during 2010-2012, as the bulk of

imports were classified in HS heading 3824.


11/55

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

US EU Brazil World

Importshareofconsum

ption(percent)

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Source: Calculated based on data from GTIS; LMC International.

Ethanol import penetration is greatest in EU market


12/55

Global ethanol exports remain dominated by Brazil and the United States

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Milliongallons

United States Brazil Central America All other

Source: GTIS; LMC International.

Note: Includes all ethanol in HS heading 2207. Quantities may include

denaturants.


13/55


14/55

U.S. Market


15/55

Major U.S. Policy Elements

Domestic policy Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS)

California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS)

EPA E15 waiver

R&D grants and loan programs (BRDI, BCAP, REAP)

Trade policy Duties

Duty drawbacks Export promotion


16/55

Major U.S. Policy Changes

Expiration of the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC)

Expiration of the Other Duty or Charge (ODC)

Expiration of CBI dehydration quota

Expiration of Cellulosic Producer Tax Credit

Expiration of Biodiesel Blenders Tax Credit

Lowering of RFS RVO for 2014

California Low Carbon Fuel Standard on pause while being revamped


17/55

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Billiongallon

s

Undifferentiated renewable Cellu losic Undiff erentiated advanced Biomass-based diesel

Source: Energy Policy Act; EISA.

Note: Data for 2006 and 2007 represent the Renewable Fuel Program. Areas represent original ethanol-equivalent volume requirements.

The Renewable Fuel Standard drives the U.S. market


18/55

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Milliongallons

Production Consumption

Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administ ration.

The RFS resulted in dramatic ethanol market growth in the mid-2000s; growth slows in 2011


19/55

California Low Carbon Fuel Standard

Not part of the RFS

Goal is to lower carbon intensity of transport fuel by 10% by 2020

Carbon credit system with carbon intensity premiums

Sugarcane ethanol generally lower than corn ethanol

However, U.S. corn ethanol producers react with adjustments

Effectiveness constrained by blend percentages

Compliance schedule on hold as regime is amended

Urgency for imports of sugarcane ethanol postponed


20/55

HTS subheading Duties/Other duty or charge Trade preference programs

Column 1 Preferential

2207.10.6010

(undenatured)

2.5 % ad

valorem

Free AGOA, ATPA, Australia, Bahrain, CAFTA-

DR , Canada, CBERA, Chile, Colombia,

GSP+ (least-developed), Israel, Jordan, Korea,

Mexico, Morocco, Oman, Panama, Peru,

Singapore

2207.20.0010

(denatured)

1.9 % ad

valorem

Free AGOA, ATPA, Australia, Bahrain, CAFTA-

DR, Canada, CBERA, Chile, Colombia, GSP+

(least-developed), Israel, Jordan, Korea,

Mexico, Morocco, Oman, Panama, Peru,

Singapore

9901.00.5000 (fuel use)

In addition to ch. 22 duties.

EXPIRED AT THE END

OF 2011. INACTIVE;

COULD BE

REINSTATED.

14.27 cents per

liter

(54 cents per

gallon)

Free GSP+ (least-developed), ATPA, CAFTA-DR,

Canada, CBERA, Colombia, Insular

Possessions, Israel, Mexico, Panama, Peru

U.S. Fuel Ethanol Duties

Source: HTSUSA.


21/55

CBI Dehydration Quota Conferred origin for ethanol dehydrated from imported hydrous

feedstocks

7% of U.S. consumption=>No local feedstock required

Additional 35 million gallons=>30% local feedstock blendrequired

Unlimited amount=>50% local feedstock blend

Applied to CBERA, DR/CAFTA, U.S. Insular Possessions

First-come, first-served

DR/CAFTA reservations for El Salvador (phase in to 25 mgy+)and Costa Rica (31 mgy+)Does not increase the quota;unfilled amount not reassigned

Expired at the end of 2011 along with the ODC. Would bereactivated if the ODC is reimposed.


22/55

Duty Drawbacks Jet fuel duty drawbacks facilitated direct imports of

anhydrous ethanol from Brazil during 2004-2008 andlikely mitigated the bulk of import duties.

Drawback provisions were amended to require ethanol inthe exported product after Oct. 1, 2008 in order to receivedrawbacks on the additional duty in HTS chapter 99; jetfuel can st ill be used for drawbacks on HTS chapter 22duties.

Consistent fuel ethanol exports since 2009 havegenerated substitution drawbacks that mit igated importduties.


23/55

How U.S. duty drawback regulations linked ethanol to jet fuel

Supplies, including jet fuel , used by U.S. carriers for overseas flights = deemed expor ts

19 U.S.C. 1309

Petroleum derivative products sharing 8-digit HTS subheading are commerciallyinterchangeable

19 U.S.C. 1313(p)

Jet fuel = HTS 2710.12.1520

Gasoline /ethanol blends (>70% gasoline by weight) = HTS 2710.12.1550

Abstracts (proprietary rul ings) held that fuel ethanol impor ts that are blended w ith gasoline

are eligible for substitu tion manufacturing drawbacks, as they are considered to be an inputand a substitute for domestic ethanol that is used for the same purpose

19 U.S.C. 1313(b)

Result

Thus, imports of fuel ethanol can claim duty drawbacks against sales of jet fuel used byU.S. carriers for overseas flights, even though jet fuel contains no ethanol

Only valid for HTS chapter 22 duties


24/55

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

1,0

00gallons

Fuel Other

Source: Estimated by the USITC based on off icial stati stics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

U.S. ethanol imports, dominated by fuel use, responded to the RFS


25/55

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

1,0

00gallons

CBI Brazil Canada All other

Source: Estimated by the USITC based on official stati stic s of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

U.S. fuel ethanol imports are dominated by Brazil (including CBI pathway)


26/55

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

January-July 2013 January-July 2014

1,0

00gall

ons

Brazil Guatemala Netherlands Spain Paraguay Nicaragua

France Costa Rica El Salvador Jamaica Sweden United Kingdom


U.S. fuel ethanol imports are substantially lower YTD 2014--Brazil, CBI


27/55

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Jan-July 2014

1,0

00gallons

Miami, FL Tampa, FL San Francisco, CA Los Angeles, CA Providence, RI New York, NY All other

Source: USITC Dataweb.

U.S. fuel ethanol imports enter mainly through ports in Florida and California


28/55

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

1,0

00gallon

s

U.S. CBI dehydration quota never fil led

Filled Unfilled

Source: Estimated by the USITC based on offi cial stati stics of the U.S. Department of Commerce; CBP.


29/55

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

1,0

00gallons

Trinidad & Tobago Jamaica El Salvador Costa Rica USVI

Source: Estimated by the USITC based on off icial statist ics of the U.S. Department of Commerce; CBP.

CBI dehydration quota stimulated investment to expand capacity


30/55

Export Promotion

Relatively new initiative

Ethanol now eligible for funding under the USDA Market AccessProgram

RFA, ABFA trade mission to Brazil in Sept-Oct 2013 sponsored bythe Brazil-U.S. Business Council

RFA, Growth Energy, U.S. Grains Council and USDA trade missionto China in May 2014; Japan and Korea in September 2014

Future missions planned to Latin American and Southeast Asia


31/55

Major Foreign Policy Issues Affecting Exports

EU RED and FQD: Changing circumstances

EU tariffs: E70 customs rul ing and AD duty

Canada: RFS; Structural market

Brazil gasoline pol icy: Prices, taxes, and blend rate

Brazil transportation costs: ICMS; ship internally by truck

Emerging markets establishing ethanol programs

Market access in potential markets: India; China


32/55

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Milliongallon

s

Canada EU-27 Brazil All other

Source: Compiled from off icial statist ics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

U.S. exports of nonbeverage ethanol increased dramatically in 2011 as Canada

implements RFS and arbitrage opens in the EU and Brazil


33/55

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Milliongallons

Netherlands United Kingdom Finland All other

Source: Compiled from off icial statist ics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Note: Schedu le B sub headings 2207.1060 and 2207.20.

U.S. exports of nonbeverage ethanol to the EU expanded in 2010-12 but

returned to nominal levels in 2013 largely in response to EU pol icy changes


34/55

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Milliongallons

US exports EU-27 imports Difference

Source: EU: GTIS, Global Trade Atlas; U.S.: Compiled from off icial statist ics of the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Note: Includes HS heading 2207. Most EU imports of fuel ethanol from the United States likely were classif ied in HS heading 3824.

A major data discrepancy regarding U.S.EU ethanol trade resulted from customs

classification and reporting differences and suggests need for harmonized standards


35/55

U.S.-EU ethanol trade classification issue

HS heading 2207 provides for ethyl alcohol, and other spi rits, denatured, of any strength.

HS subheading 2710.11 specifically provides for fuel mixtures containing at least 70 percent petroleumoils, by weight.

HS subheading 3824.90 could provide for ethanol fuel mixtures between E30 and E93?

HSC (WCO) meetingno consensus. Some informal consensus that less than 93% ethanol is the dividingline between chapter 22 and chapter 38.

ASTM specif ies maximum of 2.5% denaturant, min imum of about 92% ethanol for denatured fuel ethanolstandard (D4806).

IRS VEETC denaturant level limi ted to about 2% (up to 2.5% for rounding). (VEETC expired)

IRS proposed regulation requires additional 0.1% gasoline to qualify for VEETC. (VEETC expired)

EPA allows 2% (2.44% for rounding) denaturant to count toward RFS mandate.

EU Binding Tariff Informations (BTIs)Chapter 38 classification for mixtures as low as E93. UK,Netherlands, Sweden, Finland.

EU specificationsdiffer by member state, end use.

EU customs ruling that E70 is denatured ethanol classified in HS chapter 22.

Substantial data discrepancy between U.S. exports and EU imports.


36/55

When does denatured fuel ethanol change tariff classif ication?

Denatured

Ethanol

HS subheading 2207.20

HS heading text specifies of any strength --ambiguous

No explanatory notes at WCO level

EU duty: 0.102 euros/li ter (about 13% ad valorem)

Chemical

Mixtures

HS subheading 3824.90 Basket category, contains numerous products

EU duty: 6.5 percent ad valorem

EU E70 customs ruling effectively eliminates this category

Gasoline

Mixtures

HS subheading 2710.12

Mixtures containing at least 70% petroleum products, byweight

Not a trade issue

[denatured fuel ethanol usually 2-5% denaturant in US; WCO recommended 7%

denaturant as dividing line; no in ternational consensus]

?

70%

petrol


37/55

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Jan-12

Feb-12

Mar-12

Apr-12

May-12

Jun-12

Jul-12

Aug-12

Sep-12

Oct-12

Nov-12

Dec-12

Jan-13

Feb-13

Mar-13

Apr-13

May-13

Jun-13

Jul-13

Aug-13

Sept-13

Oct-13

Nov-13

Dec-13

Jan-14

Feb-14

Mar-14

Apr-14

May-14

Jun-14

Jul-14

Milliongallons

Canada Brazil EU28 Mexico Peru All other

Source: Compiled from offi cial statist ics of the U.S. Department of Commerce. January-March 2012 estimated by USITC.

New statistical category for U.S. fuel ethanol expor ts in 2012 clarified market data


38/55

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

400,000

450,000

500,000


1,0

00gallons

Canada Brazil United Arab Em All others


U.S. fuel ethanol exports to established markets are substantially higher in 2014


39/55

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000


1,0

00gallons

Philippines Mexico Korea Peru India Singapore Colombia Tunisia Panama


U.S. fuel exports to newer markets have also increased substantially in 2014


40/55

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

300,000

350,000

2012 2013 Jan-July 2014

1,0

00gallons

Houston-Galveston, TX Detroit, MI Pembina, ND Duluth, MN New York, NY All other

Source: USITC Dataweb.

U.S. fuel ethanol is exported mainly through ports in Texas, upper Midwest, New York


41/55

Major Domestic Market Issues

Surplus corn ethanol capacity

Blend wall

Higher-level blend infrastructure

Cellulosic shortfall

California amending LCFS


42/55

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Milliongallons

Final undifferentiated renewable fuel RVO Capacity Capacity under construction/expansion

Source: Renewable Fuels Associ ation.Note: Data are as of January 1 of the given year.

U.S. ethanol capacity nears f inal RFS obligation for undifferentiated renewable

fuel (corn ethanol)


43/55

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022

Billiongallon

s

RFS (EISA) E10 E10 (adjusted) E15 E25

Including RIN carryover

And adding additional b iomass-based diesel gal lons and RIN credits

Source: Calculated based on the RFS and EIA gasoline consu mption forecasts.

Note: Data for comparative purpo ses regarding dif ferent blends. Actual date of blend wall cons traint depends on several factors.

Although the blend wall is approaching, timing is difficult to assess


44/55

Limited availability of higher-level blends

E15: 78 stations (80% of fleet can use)

Blender pumps: 308 pumps

E85: 3,387 stations (7% of fleet can use)

Total number of gas stations: 142,000

Source: Renewable Fuels Association; E85Prices.com.


45/55

Cellulosic ethanol commercial capacity coming

online but stil l well short of original RFS

Dupont: 30 mg, IA

Poet: 25 my, IA

Abengoa: 25 my, KS Quad County: 2 my, IA

Scheduled 2014 cellulosic RVO: 1.75 bg

EPA 2014 projected range: 8-30 mg

EPA proposed 2014 cellulosic RVO: 17 mg


46/55

RFS cellulosic RVO shortfalls

EPA maintained the total advanced RVO

This effectively doubled the undifferentiated advancedRVO

Availability of alternatives inform EPAs decision Biomass-based diesel extra half RIN credits

Additional biomass-based diesel gallons

Sugarcane ethanol imports

Other domestic advanced Biogas Naptha

Renewable diesel

Ethanol (sorghum)

RIN carryover


47/55

Source: Energy Poli cy Act; EISA; 75 Fed. Reg. 76790 (December 9, 2010); various EPA Regulator y Announ cements.

Note: The cellulosic vol ume was lowered substantially 2010-2013 ; the biomass-based diesel standard was combin ed for 2009 and 2010.

YearUndifferentiated

renewable fuel

Advanced biofuel Total renewable fuel

Biomass-based

dieselCellulosic Undifferentiated

Total, advanced

biofuel

Billions of gallons Share of

gasoline/diesel

(percent)

2006 4 0 0 0 0 4 2.78

2007 4.7 0 0 0 0 4.7 4.02

2008 9 0 0 0 0 9 7.76

2009 10.5 0.5 0 0.1 0.6 11.1 10.21

2010 12 0.65 0.0065 (0.1) 0.2935 (0.2) 0.95 12.95 8.25

2011 12.6 0.8 0.0066 (0.25) 0.5434 (0.3) 1.35 13.95 8.01

2012 13.2 1 0.00865 (0.5 ) 0.99135 (0.5) 2 15.2 9.23

2013 13.8 1.28 (1) 0.014 (1) 1.456 (0.75) 2.75 16.55 9.63

2014 14.4 1 1.75 1 3.75 18.15 -

2015 15 1 3 1.5 5.5 20.5 -

2016 15 1 4.25 2 7.25 22.25 -

2017 15 1 5.5 2.5 9 24 -

2018 15 1 7 3 11 26 -

2019 15 1 8.5 3.5 13 28 -

2020 15 1 10.5 3.5 15 30 -

2021 15 1 13.5 3.5 18 33 -

2022 15 1 16 4 21 36 -

GHG reduction Percent

20 50 60 50 - - -


48/55

Cellulosic shortfall combined w ith maintenance of advanced requirement effectively doubled

the undif ferentiated advanced RVO; demand for imports of sugarcane ethanol depends on the

availability of alternatives

650800

1,0001,280

94

243

491

706

200

300

500

750

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

2010 2011 2012 2013

AdvancedRFS(millio

ngallons)

Biomass-based d iesel Cellulosic Cellulosic s hortfall Undifferentiated

Source: Calculated based on RFS.


49/55

2013 undifferentiated advanced RVO fulfillment scenarios

(RVO = 1.464 bg; cellu losic shortfall = 994 mg)

640 640800

150245

295666 580

580

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

EPA NPRM EPA FR MAX

Milliongallons

Biomass-based diesel RINs Extra biomass-based diesel gallons Other advanced 2012 Carryover RINS (D4/D5) Sugarcane ethanol

549

320

2,544

Source: Calculated based on RFS; EPA, 2013 RFS proposal and final rule.

Note: MAX scenario assumes biomass-based diesel production of 1.6 bg and other EPA scenarios in the final rule.


50/55

EPA 2014 RVO proposal

Initial proposal published November 29, 2013 Total RVO of 15.21 bg, down from 18.15 bg in RFS

Undifferentiated renewable RVO (corn) of 13.01 bg, down from 14.4 bg

in RFS

Advanced RVO of 2.20 bg, down from 3.75 bg in RFS

Cellu losic RVO of 17 mg, down from 1.75 bg in RFS Biomass-based diesel RVO of 1.28 bg, unchanged

Undifferentiated advanced RVO of 903 mg, down from 1 bg in RFS

Could resul t in a need for less than 300 mg of imported sugarcane

ethanol (903 mg - 640 BBD RIN credits - ? carryover RINS)

Proposal revised and sent to OMB for interagency review

Can take up to 90 days for review; decision expected sooner

Some RVOs expected to increase from ini tial proposal

Approval expected sometime after late October 2014


51/55

Proposal to significantly relax the LCFS compliance schedule

Year Gasoline and gasol ine blends

Carbon intensity (gCO2e/MJ) % Reduction

Baseline (may change) 95.85 -

2011 95.61 0.25

2012 95.34 0.5

2013 97.96 94.89 1.0

2014 97.47 94.41 1.5

2015 96.48 93.45 2.5

2016 95.49 92.50 3.5

2017 94.00 91.06 5.0

2018 92.52 89.62 6.5

2019 91.03 88.18 8.0

2020+ 89.06 86.27 10.0

Source: California Air Resources Board, draft Final Regulation Order, available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/CleanFinalRegOrder112612.pdf(accessed

September 9, 2014).
http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/CleanFinalRegOrder112612.pdfhttp://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/CleanFinalRegOrder112612.pdfhttp://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/CleanFinalRegOrder112612.pdf


52/55

CA LCFS carbon intensity values from applications show wide variation between and

among feedstockscorn ethanol improving carbon profile

Fuel Pathway

Carbon Intensity Values

(gCO2e/MJ)

Direct Emissions

Land Use or Other

Effects Total

Gasol ine CARBOB 99.18 0 99.18

Corn ethanol

(undenatured)

Lowest 43.21 30 73.21

Highest 62.44 30 92.44

Sugarcane ethanol

(undenatured)

Lowest 17.94 46 63.94

Highest 32.94 46 78.94

Note: As of December, 2012. Only inc ludes values from facilities that filed applicatio ns.

Source: California Air Resources Board, available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lu_tables_11282012.pdf.
http://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lu_tables_11282012.pdfhttp://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lu_tables_11282012.pdfhttp://www.arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/lu_tables_11282012.pdf


53/55

RFS RVOs may be lowered for 2014 and beyond

Increases pressure to export corn ethanol

Reduces need for imported sugarcane/molasses ethanol

California LCFS amendment

Reduces urgency for imported sugarcane/molasses ethanol

Reduces pressure to export corn ethanol

But only about 12% of U.S. market

Expiration of ODC and CBI dehydration quota

Uncertain real effect because of duty drawbacks

Eliminates pressure by trade partners to lower duties

Biodiesel blenders tax credit reinstated retroactively

Reduces need for imported sugarcane/molasses ethanol

Reduces blend wall pressure on ethanol

Summary of major policy implications for U.S. trade


54/55

Opportunities for trade

Growth in existing markets Canada; Brazil United States and EU less certain; n iches?

Development of new markets Proliferation of biofuel policies

Latin America; Asia; Africa India and China market access?

New export promotion initiative

New technology/products Improve carbon profile

Lower costs 2ndand 3rdgeneration

General trend towards lower trade barriers WTO bound duty reductions

Environmental Goods Agreement

Free Trade Agreements


55/55

Thank You!

Documents

Newman Ethanol Policy and Trade Biofuels International 14 Ghent_final