The National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA) and American Trucking Associations are suing the California Air Resources Board, which implements the standard requiring refiners, importers and blenders to reduce the carbon intensity of transportation fuels. The standard seeks to measure carbon intensity of fuels throughout their life-cycle.

The LCFS would discourage use of Canadian crude oil and ethanol produced in the Midwest – which have higher carbon-intensity ratings under the standard – “imposing undue and unconstitutional burdens on interstate commerce”, the NPRA alleges. California-produced fuels would be favoured because transport distances are shorter, yielding a lower carbon-intensity rating.

The Constitution gives authority to regulate interstate commerce to the Congress, not the states.

What’s more, says Charles Drenva, president of the NPRA, the standard will not impact greenhouse gas emissions nationwide and would harm energy security.

“Discouraging the use of North American transportation fuel sources would only create additional, unneeded burdens for California’s consumers and economy, increase our reliance on energy from less stable parts of the world, and weaken our national security,” he says in a statement.

The NPRA has warned of increasing fuels costs and an inability of the nation’s alternative fuels infrastructure to meet requirements set forth by California and other governments.

Previously, the Renewable Fuels Association attacked the LCFS for raising new obstacles to ethanol and frustrating Congress' intent in the 2007 Energy Independence Security Act.

California Air Resources Board Chairman Mary Nichols calls the lawsuit “shameful”.

“This is a critical tool to help us break our dependence on fossil fuels,” Nichols says in a statement. “It will protect us from volatile oil prices and provide consumers with cleaner fuels and provide the nation with greater energy security. Our analysis shows that producing alternative fuels under this standard can save consumers as much as $11bn over the next decade, and that’s in California alone. Instead of fighting us in court, they should be working with us to provide consumers in California and the rest of the nation with the next generation of cleaner fuels.”

As with many other climate and clean-energy initiatives, California is moving faster than other states and the federal government, positioning the case as a key test of similar fuel standards under development in the Northeast.

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger initiated California’s LCFS in 2007 with an executive order a minimum 10% reduction in carbon intensity transportation fuels used in the state by 2020. It aims to account for the “life-cycle carbon intensity” of transportation fuels, including controversial and hard-to-calculate factors such as land use conversion.

The standard was implemented last month, beginning with a reporting and record-keeping requirement. The carbon-intensity standard will not be enforced in 2010.

Photo via Flickr.