Generic Hero BannerGeneric Hero Banner
Latest market news

Canada delays completion of clean fuel standard

  • Market: Biofuels, Emissions, Oil products
  • 10/11/21

Canada will not finalize its national low-carbon fuel standard before next spring, missing a December target, the country's environmental agency said today.

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) still expects trading and enforcement of the federal Clean Fuel Standard (CFS) to begin as planned in early 2023, the agency said in a call in which it also presented proposed changes to credit generation under the program. The country's Renewable Fuel Regulation, a set of renewable mandates, would also end as planned at the end of 2022.

But this year's snap election and subsequent cabinet change required a delay that will shorten the amount of time for participants to generate compliance credits ahead of the 2023 start, the agency said.

The shortened time between when the program is finalized and when enforcement begins could be significant for "individual companies" but would not meaningfully change the program overall, ECCC executive director Paola Mellow said.

"When you do the math, it comes out a bit in a wash," Mellow said. "It is not a significant change in stringency at the national, global level."

Canada's CFS would become the second largest low-carbon fuel standard in North America, following California. Such programs set a declining ceiling for the carbon intensity of transportation fuels distributed in their markets. Canada's draft CFS would by 2030 reduce the carbon intensity of its transportation fuels by 13pc relative to 2016 levels.

Conventional, higher-carbon fuels incur deficits that obligated parties must offset with credits generated from the supply of lower-carbon fuels to their markets.

Limiting generation

ECCC today also proposed limiting those credits to sources more directly tied to Canada's fuel supply and not required by other legislation. That proposal would narrow eligible carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) projects to only those associated with fossil fuel production and in excess of other requirements.

Renewable fuel projects with CCUS components, including foreign projects, would instead gain benefits through an associated reduction in the carbon intensity of their products. Biofuel groups in particular worried that ECCC's original draft language would allow too much credit generation from sources unrelated to liquid transportation fuels.

British Columbia's LCFS program would continue to generate credits in addition to the national program under the new definition.

Canada plans to publish its lifecycle analysis methodology this fall, with training on the system available early next year. The system will determine how many credits and deficits each fuel will generate under the Canadian system. Each LCFS program so far has used its own, non-fungible system.

ECCC will separately develop a system to account for renewable natural gas used to produce low-carbon intensity hydrogen for use at fossil fuel facilities in summer 2022.

The agency restarted its stakeholder outreach for the CFS this month. Discussions with provinces resumed this week, with plans for additional stakeholder meetings in December, February and March.

Regulators originally planned to finalize the rule by the end of this year, with trading of credits to satisfy the new requirements beginning in 2023. The government said it does not expect deficit generation to outpace credits before 2027.

"I understand this is significant," Mellow said of the delays. "This is simply the best we could do."


Sharelinkedin-sharetwitter-sharefacebook-shareemail-share

Related news posts

Argus illuminates the markets by putting a lens on the areas that matter most to you. The market news and commentary we publish reveals vital insights that enable you to make stronger, well-informed decisions. Explore a selection of news stories related to this one.

News
15/01/25

IEA nudges global refinery runs forecast higher

IEA nudges global refinery runs forecast higher

London, 15 January (Argus) — The IEA has made a marginal increase to its forecast for global refinery runs this year, driven by the "recent resilient performance" of US and European refineries. The Paris-based energy watchdog now expects global crude throughput of 83.4mn b/d in 2025, whereas its previous projection was 83.3mn b/d. At the same time, it has trimmed its estimate for 2024 runs by 20,000 b/d to 82.7mn b/d on the back of downgrades in Asian throughput. The slight upgrade to the 2025 forecast assumes that US and European refineries extend their recent resilience through the first quarter. But "even as we turn more positive on the short-term outlook, it is important to acknowledge that European refineries remain under pressure from shifting trade patterns, rising carbon costs, higher energy outlays and looming capacity closures", the IEA said today in its latest Oil Market Report (OMR). OECD throughput is forecast to fall by 370,000 b/d to 35.7mn b/d this year "as capacity closures in the United States and Europe drag on activity levels", the agency said. But it marks an upwards revision from last month's projection for the OECD of 35.6mn b/d in 2025. The IEA sees non-OECD refinery runs rising by 1mn b/d to 47.6mn b/d this year. This is a downwards adjustment of 80,000 b/d from the last OMR, but the IEA also trimmed its estimate for 2024 non-OECD throughput by the same amount — so the growth rate is unchanged. The 2025 forecasts for India, China, Pakistan, the Philippines and Singapore have all been cut compared with last month's OMR. The IEA now expects Chinese runs to rise by 240,000 b/d to 14.8mn b/d this year. Last month's forecast had Chinese throughput increasing to 14.9mn b/d. "2025 could prove to be another challenging year for Chinese independent refineries, despite increased crude import quotas, as higher import duties squeeze profitability and recent US sanctions impact access to Russian and Iranian barrels," the agency said. The IEA has raised its 2025 forecast for Nigerian throughput by 60,000 b/d to 460,000 b/d, citing the restart of state-owned NNPC's Warri and Port Harcourt refineries and the start-up of Dangote's 150,000 b/d residue fluid catalytic cracking unit. But it noted that challenges remain in terms of crude supply. By Josh Michalowski Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Find out more
News

Q&A: Waste-based biofuel to benefit Dutch bunkering


15/01/25
News
15/01/25

Q&A: Waste-based biofuel to benefit Dutch bunkering

New York, 15 January (Argus) — With marine fuel greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions regulations tightening, shipowners are looking for financially feasible biofuel options. Argus spoke with Leonidas Kanonis , director for communications and analysis at European waste-based and advanced biofuels association (Ewaba), about biofuels for bunkering. Edited highlights follow. Do you think that the Netherlands government will scrap the HBE-G bio-tickets that it has been allocating for marine fuel for use by ocean-going vessels? HBEs are not disappearing in 2025, and the Dutch system will continue as normal, including HBE-G bio tickets. In 2026, the plan is that HBEs will be scrapped altogether, when the Dutch system switches to an Emissions Reduction Obligation. The Emissions Reduction Obligation would be a transposition of the Renewable Energy Directive (REDIII) spanning all transport sectors and HBEs would not exist under such a system. Annex IX of REDIII lists sustainable biofuel feedstocks for advanced biofuels (Part A) and waste-based biofuels (Part B). Under the proposed REDIII, EWABA is advocating those fuels made from feedstocks listed under Annex IX B, which include used cooking oil and animal fat, be allowed into the sustainability criteria for maritime transport. Allowing only "advanced" feedstocks listed under Annex IX A would put the Dutch bunkering sector at a cost-and-supply disadvantage compared with non-EU ports. The Annex IX B exclusion could also put the Netherlands in danger of not hitting its maritime sector target, which rises from a 3.6pc reduction in GHGs in 2026 to 8.2pc in 2030. Annex IX B biodiesel can bridge the gap while advanced technologies such as ammonia and hydrogen are more widely deployed. The EU imposed anti-dumping taxes on Chinese biodiesel imports in mid-August. What has been the effect on European biodiesel producers? Following the Chinese anti-dumping duties (ADDs), we have seen an uptick in domestic European waste-based biodiesel prices, widening the spread between the end product and the European domestic feedstock itself. On the other hand, on 1 December, the Chinese government cancelled the export tax rebate for used cooking oil (UCO), disincentivizing Chinese exporters and making Chinese UCO more expensive for European buyers. It is still early to say what the trend for 2025 will be, but as an industry we are optimistic about increased European biodiesel production. Over the past two years, our members have been suffering, mostly operating at sub-optimal production levels or forced to shut down production. In 2025, there is reserved optimism that the market will improve due to: the ADDs to Chinese biodiesel, the 2025 FuelEU maritime regulation, and the introduction of the EU Database for Biofuels introduced in 2024, which tracks the lifecycle of biofuels and strengthens transparency. Are there other threats next year that are facing the European waste-based and advanced biofuels producers? Overall challenges for the market would be demand for feedstock from competing industries, largely the sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) market with the introduction of the ReFuelEU mandate, but also competing regions as the US imported huge amounts of waste feedstocks from China last year, while southeast Asian and UAE countries promote their own bio-blending targets. Do you think Donald Trump's presidency would affect Europe's biofuel markets? We expect the Trump administration to possibly limit feedstock imports from outside the US, boosting the sales of local soybean and other crop feedstocks to produce domestic HVO, SAF and biodiesel. At the same time, the US government has noted they will impose duties on imports coming from anywhere, with China experiencing the most considerable level of duties of up to 60pc. For example, an import tax on European and UK biodiesel would mean that more fuel is available to fulfill the European and UK mandates, as the US is also relying on HVO and FAME from Europe and the UK to fulfill its own mandates. Biofuel for bunkering has been a popular low-carbon fuel option among container ship companies. But oil tanker owners and dry bulk carrier owners are slower to embrace biofuels. Do you see this changing? At the moment, most biofuels used in shipping are indeed for container ship companies that could more easily afford higher prices of bio components. The biofuels industry is receiving a lot of interest from tanker or carrier owners but for lower biofuel blends compared to container ship companies. Container vessels are willing to buy higher biofuel blends and are interested in B100. Oil tankers are focusing more on B15 and higher bio blends to comply with the minimum GHG reduction targets possible. But as the GHG reduction targets on the FuelEU rise, this will of course change as well. In 2030, what do you project will be the demand for biofuels for bunkering in Europe? As an estimation, we expect waste biofuels bunkering demand in Europe to surpass 2-2.5mn tons by 2030. Specification-wise, what are some of biofuel properties that ship owners need to look out for? We don't believe waste-based and advanced biodiesel fuel properties have considerable issues for ship operators. Especially for blends up to B30, there is nothing to worry about. For higher blends, viscosity and stability are the ones that I believe are more important. Storage time is also important to consider due to lower oxidative stability of FAME compared with fossil diesel alternatives that could be stored longer term. By Stefka Wechsler Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

Colonial shuts Line 1 due to Georgia spill: Update


14/01/25
News
14/01/25

Colonial shuts Line 1 due to Georgia spill: Update

Houston, 14 January (Argus) — Colonial Pipeline's main gasoline bearing line may be closed for more than a day as the company responds to a gasoline spill in Georgia detected on Tuesday. "Colonial has taken Line 1 out of service temporarily while we respond to a potential product release," the company said in a notice. "Normal operations continue on the remainder of the system." The spill occurred in Paulding County, Georgia, about 25 miles southwest of Marietta, Georgia. The company said it had crews on site responding to the incident. The company did not provide information on when the line would restart. Market sources said leak was small but it could take up to two days to resume operations. Line 1 has capacity to carry up to 1.3mn b/d of gasoline from Houston, Texas, to Greensboro, North Carolina. Cash prices for US Gulf coast 87 conventional gasoline in the Gulf coast ended Tuesday's session down by 3.19¢/USG at $2.115/USG, reversing gains from the previous session's 14-week high that was driven by higher blending demand. Liquidity fell during Tuesday's trading session with uncertainty over the length of the pipeline shut-down. The pipeline leak did not affect line space trading on Tuesday, which had already been falling. Values saw their sixth session of losses, shedding 0.25¢/USG day-over-day. A trade was reported at -1.5¢/USG, prior to the notice of the pipeline shut down, with no further trades reported for the remainder of the session. By Hannah Borai Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

New York to propose GHG market rules in 'coming months’


14/01/25
News
14/01/25

New York to propose GHG market rules in 'coming months’

Houston, 14 January (Argus) — Draft rules for New York's carbon market will be ready in the "coming months," governor Kathy Hochul (D) said today. Regulators from the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) "will take steps forward on" establishing a cap-and-invest program and propose new emissions reporting requirements for sources while also creating "a robust investment planning process," Hochul said during her state of the state message. But the governor did not provide a timeline for the process beyond saying the agency's work do this work "over the coming months." Hochul's remarks come after regulators in September delayed plans to begin implementing New York's cap-and-invest program (NYCI) to 2026. At the time, DEC deputy commissioner Jon Binder said that draft regulations would be released "in the next few months." DEC, NYSERDA and Hochul's office each did not respond to requests for comment. Some environmental groups applauded Hochul's remarks, while also expressing concern about the state's next steps. Evergreen Action noted that the timeline for NYCI "appears uncertain" and called on lawmakers to "commit to this program in the 2025 budget." "For New York's economy, environment and legacy, we hope the governor commits to finalizing a cap-and-invest program this year," the group said. State law from 2019 requires New York to achieve a 40pc reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from 1990 levels by 2030 and an 85pc reduction by 2050. A state advisory group in 2022 issued a scoping plan that recommended the creation of an economy-wide carbon market to help the state reach those goals. By Ida Balakrishna Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

News

California GHG rulemaking hits speedbump


14/01/25
News
14/01/25

California GHG rulemaking hits speedbump

Houston, 14 January (Argus) — The California Air Resources Board (CARB) cap-and-trade program rulemaking is likely to weather further delays, according to one of the agency's top officials. The agency's "immediate" responsibility is to work with covered entities impacted by the ongoing Los Angeles County wildfires across its programs, according to deputy executive officer Rajinder Sahota. This means that the rulemaking is not "imminent or in the next few weeks." In addition, the agency needs to move carefully given the federal administration change , along with the negative response to proposed updates to the state's Low Carbon Fuel Standard received last year. CARB continues to evaluate program changes, with a focus on affordability, ambition and compliance costs. "We want to take time to ensure we get out foundational facts about the program especially as the legislature takes up the post-2030 role of the program," Sahota said. The cap-and-trade rulemaking has been marked by a series of delays, as regulators initially in 2023 estimated it would finish last year. In December , CARB said it would delay the publication of draft amendments until early 2025. CARB began to prepare for the rulemaking nearly two years ago, floating the idea of moving the cap-and-trade program to a more-stringent 2030 greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction target of a 48pc, compared with 1990 levels, rather than the current 40pc mandate. The agency's 2022 Scoping Plan prompted the idea as it showed a need for increased program ambition for California to remain on track for its target of net-zero by 2045. In line with this increased ambition, CARB will need to remove at least 180mn metric tonnes (t) of allowances from the 2026-2030 auction and allocation annual budgets to start with, and up to 265mn t in total from the program budgets from 2026-2045, agency staff have said. Quebec, California's partner in the Western Climate Initiative (WCI) carbon market, previously delayed publishing its draft package from the originally planned September 2024 to the first quarter of this year, with implementation expected in the spring. While the regulation was nearly complete in late September, the Quebec Environmental Ministry decided to postpone, citing the need to wait for California. If California delays its work through the first quarter of the year, this will likely require Quebec to also push back its rulemaking. This will also shorten the runway for both market partners to formally implement changes by 2026. The news has punctured the bullish sentiment for market participants on a timely end to the rulemaking. California carbon allowances for December delivery initially traded as high as $35.25/t on the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) ahead of the announcement. The contract traded as low as $33.01/t after midday on Nodal Exchange following the news, before sliding lower in later trade. Outside of the WCI, Washington is also likely to see a slowdown in its carbon market ambitions. The state Department of Ecology is conducting its own rulemaking to align Washington's "cap-and-invest" program to facilitate linkage with the larger WCI market. But it will require California and Quebec to finalize their expected changes. California has indicated over last year that it does not intend to focus fully on linkage until its current rulemaking is complete. California's and Quebec's cap-and-trade programs cover major sources of the state's GHG emissions, including power plants and transportation fuels. By Denise Cathey Send comments and request more information at feedback@argusmedia.com Copyright © 2025. Argus Media group . All rights reserved.

Generic Hero Banner

Business intelligence reports

Get concise, trustworthy and unbiased analysis of the latest trends and developments in oil and energy markets. These reports are specially created for decision makers who don’t have time to track markets day-by-day, minute-by-minute.

Learn more