Green Fuel Demand Drives Deforestation

The Hidden Cost of Green Fuel: Is Your Council's Bin Lorry Fuelling Deforestation?

Alarm is growing that the fuel used in "green" refuse lorries throughout Britain could be a factor in the depletion of crucial rainforest ecosystems. A significant increase in the need for HVO has highlighted its problematic connection to palm oil, a main cause of forest clearing. This situation presents a stark paradox for communities striving for environmental responsibility.

Numerous municipal bodies across the United Kingdom have started running their heavy-duty vehicles on HVO. Councils in Dorset, Belfast, and Hounslow are among those who have adopted this fuel. The change was prompted by assertions that HVO, created from renewable inputs including animal fats and vegetable-based oils, provides a greener substitute for standard diesel fuel, allegedly reducing emissions by up to 90%.

The core of the controversy lies in the sourcing of HVO's raw materials. While suppliers often provide assurances of sustainability, a significant portion of HVO production is linked to palm oil. This connection raises serious questions about the true environmental impact of what is marketed as a green fuel, forcing a re-evaluation of its role in the UK's decarbonisation strategy.

Whitehall has initiated an official inquiry regarding these allegations. This inquiry follows mounting evidence and whistleblower reports suggesting that the supply chain is not as clean as advertised. The investigation's outcome could have profound implications for councils and companies that have invested heavily in HVO as their flagship green initiative.

Experts increasingly argue that HVO is a flawed solution for greening the transport sector. They encourage a more decisive shift towards the electrification of vehicle fleets. This perspective suggests that while HVO appears to be a convenient "drop-in" replacement for diesel, it may divert attention and resources from the more challenging but ultimately more sustainable goal of full electrification.

Understanding HVO

Hydrotreated vegetable oil, a type of biofuel also known as renewable diesel, can be utilised in regular diesel engines without any alterations. Its chemical similarity to fossil diesel allows it to be a direct replacement, offering comparable performance without the need for expensive vehicle conversions. This convenience is a major factor in its growing appeal for businesses and local governments.

The production process involves treating various oils and fats with hydrogen at high temperatures. This process removes oxygen and other impurities, resulting in a clean-burning, stable fuel. The possible raw materials are varied, encompassing everything from pre-used cooking oil (UCO) and animal-derived fats to multiple kinds of plant-based oils, including rapeseed, sunflower, and, most controversially, palm oil.

The primary environmental claim associated with HVO is its capacity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 90% compared to traditional diesel. This remarkable figure is based on the lifecycle analysis of the fuel, which considers the carbon absorbed by the plants used in its production. It is this "low-carbon" credential that has made HVO a favored option for entities aiming to swiftly enhance their ecological footprint.

 Image Credit - Freepik

The Direct Link to Deforestation

A significant factor behind deforestation is the application of palm-derived oil in making HVO, especially within the tropical zones of Malaysia and Indonesia. These countries are the world's largest palm oil producers, and the expansion of plantations has led to the widespread clearing of ancient rainforests. This habitat destruction has devastating consequences for biodiversity, threatening species like orangutans, tigers, and rhinos.

Furthermore, the process of clearing these forests often involves burning, which releases vast quantities of stored carbon into the atmosphere, exacerbating climate change. The carbon footprint of deforestation can negate, and even outweigh, the supposed emissions savings from using the resulting biofuel. This creates a situation where a fuel marketed as "green" is, in fact, contributing significantly to global warming.

Although numerous British suppliers assert they refrain from using pure palm oil, verifying these statements is challenging due to intricate global supply networks. The worldwide appetite for biofuel places enormous strain on manufacturing companies, making the allure of cheap and abundant palm oil hard to resist. This reality casts a long shadow over the sustainability claims of the entire HVO industry.

Palm Oil in Disguise: The POME Problem

A key element of the dispute involves POME, which stands for Palm Oil Mill Effluent. This liquid sludge is a residue generated during the milling of palm oil. Under European Union and UK regulations, fuels derived from waste products can receive special incentives and count for more towards renewable transport targets. This classification has made POME a highly sought-after commodity for biofuel producers.

Yet, a recent inquiry from the advocacy organization T&E revealed a huge inconsistency. During 2023, consumption of POME-derived biofuels in Europe and the UK reached about two million tonnes. This amount is almost twice the roughly one million tonnes of POME thought to be accessible worldwide annually, which indicates extensive fraudulent practices.

From this information, it can be logically inferred that pure palm oil is probably being passed off as POME for systemic exploitation. This "palm oil in disguise" allows producers to profit from green subsidies while continuing to drive deforestation. The chemical similarity between processed POME and regular palm oil makes it extremely difficult for authorities to detect the fraud through testing alone.

A Global Web of Deception

The data pointing to POME fraud has triggered alarms across Europe. Throughout 2023, the biggest users of POME included Germany, the UK, Italy, and Spain, with consumption in some nations having grown exponentially in recent years. The vast quantity of these imports prompted T&E to state that Britain is receiving what is almost definitely misrepresented pure palm oil, originating from unethical sources.

The issue is compounded by the fact that certification processes rely heavily on paperwork and audits, which can be manipulated. Whistleblowers from within the biofuel industry have reported instances where shipments were knowingly mislabelled, with internal pressures to ignore the evidence. This systemic weakness undermines the credibility of the entire sustainability certification framework for biofuels.

The transport department in the UK has acknowledged it is looking into these grave claims, working with international partners to uncover the extent of the problem. The findings could force a major policy shift, potentially restricting the use of HVO derived from any palm-related products and increasing pressure on suppliers to prove the provenance of their feedstocks beyond any doubt.

The Used Cooking Oil Alternative

Reacting to the escalating worries about palm oil, numerous British councils and fuel providers have pivoted to an option they see as more sustainable: HVO produced with pre-used cooking oil (UCO). Because it is a true waste material, UCO avoids causing land-use shifts and is widely regarded as a more ethically sound source for biofuel production. Many councils have received assurances from their suppliers that their HVO is sourced exclusively from UCO.

The global appetite for biofuels, however, has created an intense international market for UCO. Nations in Europe currently use a much higher volume of pre-used cooking oil than their domestic output allows, which results in a sharp increase in shipments from other countries, especially China. In fact, Europe burns through eight times more UCO than it collects, creating a significant supply deficit filled by international trade.

This reliance on imported waste oil introduces its own set of environmental and ethical questions. Transporting a waste material from one side of the globe to the other to create an "eco-friendly" fuel carries a substantial carbon footprint. Experts question the logic of this global trade when the UCO could be used more locally to decarbonise transport in its country of origin.

Fraud Follows the Demand for UCO

The booming UCO market has unfortunately become a new frontier for fraud. The high prices and green credentials associated with UCO create a powerful incentive to mislabel cheaper, less sustainable oils. There are widespread allegations that virgin vegetable oils, including palm oil, are being mixed with or passed off entirely as pre-used cooking oil to deceive buyers and regulators.

Studies have revealed major inconsistencies in commercial data. Malaysia, for example, reportedly exports a quantity of UCO that is triple the amount it gathers officially, pointing to a high likelihood of fraudulent sourcing. Even though China's reported exports seem to better match its gathering capabilities, questions remain about its domestic consumption, which could reveal similar inconsistencies.

The European Commission has launched investigations into these fraudulent flows, specifically looking at whether Indonesian biodiesel is being routed through China and the UK to avoid tariffs and duties. These investigations underscore the systemic challenges in verifying the authenticity of global biofuel supply chains, leaving consumers and even large-scale buyers in the dark about the true origin of their "sustainable" fuel.

The Limits of Certification

To combat fraud, the biofuel industry relies on certification schemes like the International Sustainability and Carbon Certification (ISCC). These organizations are tasked with auditing the entire network of supply and delivering the sustainability verification that suppliers pass on to their customers, such as UK councils. Fuel suppliers in the UK often point to their ISCC verification as a guarantee of their product's integrity.

However, critics argue these schemes have significant limitations. The auditing process is often based on reviewing documents rather than extensive physical inspection, creating loopholes for fraudulent paperwork to pass through. The European Commission has itself noted that certain materials can be easily altered to appear as legitimate waste products, making fraud hard to detect without more robust enforcement.

The scale of the alleged POME and UCO fraud suggests that the current certification systems are not sufficient to guarantee a truly sustainable supply chain. Campaign groups are now calling for the removal of incentives for certain feedstocks like POME and for stricter, independent anti-fraud units to be established to police the market more effectively.

Image Credit - Freepik

Councils Caught in the Middle

Municipal bodies throughout the United Kingdom began using HVO aiming to make an environmentally beneficial decision. The fuel's "drop-in" nature presented a seemingly straightforward way to reduce emissions from their vehicle fleets without the massive upfront cost and logistical challenges of electrification. Councils were acting on the information and assurances provided by their suppliers.

Numerous councils have received explicit assurances that the HVO they buy is free of palm oil and created from certified waste materials, like pre-used cooking oil. They rely on the verification provided by bodies like the Renewable Fuel Assurance Scheme (RFAS) and the governmental transport department to confirm these assertions. The recent revelations have therefore placed them in a difficult position.

The choice to not electrify immediately is often based on practical concerns. For councils serving large or rural areas, the limited range of current electric heavy-duty vehicles is a significant barrier. The high purchase price of electric lorries and the cost of installing depot-based charging infrastructure present further financial hurdles that many public sector budgets cannot yet accommodate.

The Expert Consensus: Electrify

Despite the practical challenges, environmental consultants and transport experts are clear in their assessment: HVO is not the long-term answer. They argue that any benefits from HVO are, at best, a short-term stopgap and, at worst, a harmful distraction from the necessary transition to electric vehicles. The focus, they insist, should be on surmounting the obstacles to electrification with great urgency.

The core of the argument is that raw materials for sustainable biofuels, such as authentic pre-used cooking oil, represent a limited and valuable commodity. These substances are critically required to reduce carbon in industries where going electric is not currently feasible, including in the shipping and airline sectors. Using this limited resource in road transport, where electric solutions exist and are improving, is seen as a misallocation.

Experts suggest that by embracing HVO, councils are delaying the inevitable and potentially prolonging the use of fuels with questionable environmental credentials. The perceived ease and lower initial cost of HVO may feel like a pragmatic choice now, but it could ultimately hinder the broader energy transition by creating a false sense of progress and diverting investment from zero-emission technologies.

Image Credit - Freepik

The Hurdles for Electric Lorries

The transition to electric heavy goods vehicles (eHGVs) is not without its own significant challenges. The upfront cost of an electric lorry can be two to three times that of its diesel equivalent, a major barrier for both public sector and commercial fleet operators. Limited government financial support for eHGVs makes this initial investment even more daunting.

Charging infrastructure presents another enormous hurdle. Heavy lorries require high-capacity, megawatt charging stations, which are currently scarce. Installing the necessary infrastructure at depots is a complex and expensive process, often requiring significant upgrades to the local electricity grid that can take years to approve and complete.

Vehicle range and payload capacity are also critical concerns. The weight of the large batteries needed to power a heavy lorry reduces its potential payload. Furthermore, the current range of most eHGVs is less than half that of a diesel truck, making them unsuitable for long-haul routes without a network of purpose-built public charging hubs, which do not yet exist at scale.

A Pathway for Fleet Electrification

Despite the obstacles, the pathway towards an electrified heavy vehicle fleet is becoming clearer. Whitehall has established aggressive goals, phasing out the sale of new smaller diesel lorries by 2035 and all new HGVs by 2040. To support this, programmes like the £200 million Zero Emission HGV and Infrastructure Demonstrator (ZEHID) are funding real-world trials.

This initiative is helping to get hundreds of the heaviest battery-electric and hydrogen fuel cell vehicles on UK roads, supported by new public and depot-based charging installations. Projects like the Electric Freightway, led by GRIDSERVE, are specifically focused on building a network of eHGV charging hubs at motorway service areas, directly addressing the range anxiety associated with long-distance electric trucking.

While the transition will be gradual, the environmental benefits are substantial. Electrifying the UK's half-a-million HGVs could prevent approximately 20 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent from entering the atmosphere each year. The data gathered from ongoing trials will be crucial in building the business case for wider adoption and demonstrating the total cost of ownership, helping operators plan for a zero-emission future.

The Finite Resource Argument

A critical reason to prioritise electrification over biofuels for road transport is resource competition. Genuinely sustainable raw materials, including UCO and animal-derived fats, face intense demand across various industries. The aviation industry, in particular, is relying on these materials to produce Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF), as electric long-haul flight is not yet feasible.

Every litre of HVO burned in a bin lorry that could have been electrified is a litre of feedstock that cannot be used for a plane or a ship. This creates a displacement effect, where solving an emissions problem in one area exacerbates it in another. Experts argue that road transport, being relatively easier to electrify, should be the first to move away from combustion fuels entirely.

This leaves the limited supply of waste-based biofuels for the truly hard-to-abate sectors. This strategic approach to resource allocation is seen as essential for achieving economy-wide decarbonisation goals. It avoids the potential pitfalls of fraudulent supply chains while directing investment towards the most effective long-term solutions for each mode of transport.

Conclusion: A Flawed Solution on the Road to Zero

The narrative surrounding hydrotreated vegetable oil serves as a warning for our era of carbon reduction. It shows how a solution that appears simple and green on the surface can conceal a complex and damaging reality. The strong evidence of fraudulent supply chains, linking HVO to deforestation and questionable waste products, undermines its credibility as a truly sustainable fuel.

For UK councils that adopted HVO with the best intentions, this situation demands a critical reassessment. While the practical challenges of electrification are real, the environmental and ethical risks associated with HVO are too significant to ignore. The convenience of a "drop-in" fuel cannot justify the potential destruction of vital ecosystems.

The final step to achieving carbon-neutral road travel involves zero-emission technologies. The journey requires significant investment, strategic planning, and a commitment to overcoming the substantial hurdles of cost and infrastructure. Relying on intermediate solutions like HVO, which are fraught with problems, only serves to delay this essential transition and risks derailing the very environmental goals we seek to achieve.