Bio of a fuel

On March 1, Chevron shut down two biofuel plants in Iowa and Wisconsin, blaming the EPA for its disappointing revision of biofuel mandates, which, the company said, “caused an imbalance in supply and demand.”

On June 21, Bloomberg reported that BP was changing its plans for two biofuel facilities — in the U.S. and Germany — eyeing a mixed processing of both biofuels and petroleum instead of pure biofuel processing.

On July 2, Shell said in a news release it was pausing the construction of a biofuels plant in Rotterdam “to address project delivery and ensure future competitiveness given current market conditions.”

On July 8, Bloomberg again reported that biofuel makers in the U.S. were turning to so-called sustainable aviation fuels because of “Slumping returns from renewable diesel production.”

On August 1, Shell reported an impairment of $800 million related to the Rotterdam biofuels plant without further explanation. It also reported a $187-million loss from its “Renewables & Energy Solutions Business” but that was probably just a coincidence.

Biofuels are one of the pillars of the transition. Along with the Cartier of fuels — “sustainable aviation fuels” — bioethanol and biodiesel were supposed to be the fuel of tomorrow. Instead, they are crashing and they are crashing hard. Because someone once again forgot how demand and supply work, even with subsidies. It’s solar all over again, but more expensive.