Solutions
Industries
Regulations
Resources
Company
Key takeaways
In our previous article, we explored how the UK’s Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) creates demand for renewable fuels through Renewable Transport Fuel Certificates (RTFCs).
What we didn’t explain is why two renewable fuel shipments with seemingly similar properties can generate very different levels of value. Why does biodiesel produced from used cooking oil often attract greater commercial interest than biodiesel produced from conventional vegetable oils? Why are some feedstocks actively sought after by traders and fuel producers while others face increasing restrictions? And why has a waste product collected from restaurants become one of the most strategically important commodities in global renewable fuel markets?
The answer lies in feedstock eligibility. Over the last decade, the RTFO has evolved from a policy primarily focused on increasing renewable fuel volumes into a system that increasingly rewards fuels based on how they are produced and what feedstocks they use.
Understanding this evolution is critical for anyone participating in renewable fuel supply chains.
Related Reading: UK RTFO Explained: How Renewable Fuels Are Incentivized in the UK
At first glance, it might seem logical that all renewable fuels should receive similar treatment. After all, they are all intended to reduce reliance on fossil fuels. However, policymakers increasingly realised that the sustainability benefits of renewable fuels can vary significantly depending on the feedstock used.
A litre of biodiesel made from used cooking oil is fundamentally different from a litre of biodiesel made from a purpose-grown crop. Questions emerged around:
As these concerns became better understood, renewable fuel policies evolved to distinguish between different feedstock pathways. The result is a market where the feedstock often matters just as much as the fuel itself.
When renewable fuel policies first emerged, crop-based feedstocks dominated the market.
Examples included:
At the time, the primary goal was increasing renewable fuel volumes. However, policymakers soon realised that simply replacing fossil fuels with crop-derived biofuels did not automatically guarantee better sustainability outcomes.
As demand for biofuel feedstocks increased, concerns emerged regarding agricultural expansion and the unintended environmental consequences of large-scale feedstock production. This led regulators to increasingly favour fuels derived from wastes and residues. The logic was simple. If a material already exists as a waste stream, using it as a renewable fuel feedstock generally creates fewer sustainability concerns than growing additional crops specifically for fuel production.
This shift remains one of the most important developments in renewable fuel policy.
One of the concepts that influenced renewable fuel policy most significantly is indirect land-use change, commonly known as ILUC. The concept can be illustrated with a simple example.
Imagine global demand for soybean oil increases because it is increasingly used for biodiesel production. Farmers respond by growing more soybeans. Over time, additional agricultural land may be required to satisfy demand. In some cases, forests, grasslands, or other ecosystems may be converted into agricultural land. The resulting emissions can offset a significant portion of the climate benefits originally expected from the renewable fuel. This phenomenon is known as indirect land-use change.
While the precise impact remains subject to debate, concerns around ILUC became one of the major drivers behind policies that increasingly favour waste-derived feedstocks over conventional crops.
Not all feedstocks are viewed equally under renewable fuel regulations. Broadly speaking, they can be grouped into three categories.
Examples include:
These feedstocks played a major role in the early growth of renewable fuels but have become increasingly scrutinised due to sustainability concerns.
Examples include:
These feedstocks are generally favoured because they avoid many of the concerns associated with dedicated crop production.
Examples include:
These feedstocks are often viewed as strategically important for the future of transport decarbonisation.
Not all feedstocks are viewed equally under renewable fuel regulations.
Broadly speaking, they can be grouped into three categories.
Examples include:
These feedstocks played a major role in the early growth of renewable fuels but have become increasingly scrutinised due to sustainability concerns.
Examples include:
These feedstocks are generally favoured because they avoid many of the concerns associated with dedicated crop production.
Examples include:
These feedstocks are often viewed as strategically important for the future of transport decarbonisation.
One of the most important concepts within the RTFO is double counting.Certain qualifying renewable fuels produced from approved waste and residue feedstocks can generate two RTFCs instead of one. The physical fuel does not change. The compliance value does.This additional value is one of the reasons waste-derived feedstocks are so commercially attractive.
To understand how feedstock eligibility affects commercial value, consider two renewable fuel supply chains. In the first, biodiesel is produced from rapeseed oil. In the second, biodiesel is produced from used cooking oil (UCO).
From a fuel quality perspective, both products may ultimately serve the same purpose. They may be blended into diesel supplied to the same market. However, from a compliance perspective, they are very different. Because used cooking oil is classified as a waste feedstock, it aligns more closely with the policy objectives of the RTFO. It does not require additional agricultural land, does not compete directly with food production, and is generally viewed as delivering stronger sustainability outcomes.
As a result, the compliance value associated with UCO-derived fuel is often significantly higher than that associated with fuel produced from conventional crop feedstocks. This difference influences decisions throughout the supply chain. A collector deciding whether to expand a UCO collection network, a trader evaluating a cargo, and a fuel producer assessing feedstock procurement strategies are all responding to the additional value created by the feedstock itself.
In many cases, the premium is driven not by the fuel, but by the sustainability characteristics attached to the feedstock from which it was produced.
Not All Feedstocks Are Viewed Equally
The RTFO increasingly differentiates feedstocks based on their sustainability characteristics. The table below provides a simplified view of how different feedstock categories are generally perceived within renewable fuel policy.
| Feedstock Category | Examples | General Policy Direction |
| Conventional Crops | Rapeseed oil, soybean oil, palm oil, corn | Increasing scrutiny due to food competition and ILUC concerns |
| Waste Oils | Used cooking oil | Used cooking oil |
| Animal Fats | Certain animal fat categories | Often receive favourable treatment depending on classification |
| Residues | Agricultural and industrial residues | Increasing policy support |
| Advanced Feedstocks | Lignocellulosic biomass, waste gases, advanced pathways | Strong long-term policy focus |
The exact treatment depends on the applicable regulations and feedstock classification, but the overall direction is clear: policy increasingly favours feedstocks that minimise land-use impacts while delivering strong greenhouse gas reductions.
The purpose of double counting is not to artificially inflate renewable fuel volumes. Instead, it is designed to direct investment toward feedstocks that are generally considered to deliver stronger sustainability outcomes.
By increasing the compliance value associated with certain waste streams, policymakers encourage investment in:
Without these incentives, many waste-derived feedstocks would struggle to compete economically against conventional alternatives.
Few feedstocks illustrate this shift better than used cooking oil. Used cooking oil was once viewed primarily as a disposal problem. Today, it is one of the most sought-after renewable fuel feedstocks in the world. Why? Because it addresses many of the concerns associated with crop-based biofuels. Used cooking oil:
As a result, UCO has become a cornerstone feedstock for renewable diesel and biodiesel production. The growth has been so significant that used cooking oil is now traded globally. A litre of cooking oil discarded in a restaurant in Asia may ultimately become renewable fuel consumed in Europe or the United Kingdom.
For a trader, two cargoes of renewable fuel may have similar physical properties but very different commercial value.
A trader evaluating a cargo often needs to understand:
The value of a renewable fuel transaction therefore depends not only on fuel quality but also on the quality of the sustainability data supporting it. This is one reason sustainability documentation has become a critical commercial asset throughout renewable fuel supply chains.
The moment a feedstock receives additional value, verification becomes important. Consider the economics. If a fuel producer receives greater compliance value when a feedstock is classified as used cooking oil rather than virgin vegetable oil, the incentive to misclassify materials increases.
The renewable fuel industry has faced repeated concerns relating to:
This is one reason regulators place increasing emphasis on audits, certification systems, and supply chain controls. Without confidence in feedstock claims, the entire incentive system becomes vulnerable.
A common misconception is that a qualifying feedstock automatically guarantees compliance value. It does not.
Even if a feedstock is eligible, suppliers must still demonstrate:
The quality of the supporting data can be just as important as the feedstock itself. A qualifying feedstock without sufficient evidence may not deliver the expected RTFC value.
A single RTFC claim may depend on information originating from multiple companies across multiple countries.
For example:
Restaurant → Collector → Aggregator → Biodiesel Producer → Trader → UK Fuel Supplier
The UK fuel supplier may ultimately generate the RTFCs. However, the evidence supporting those RTFCs originates much earlier in the supply chain. If documentation is incomplete or inconsistent at any stage, the value associated with the fuel may be affected.
This is why sustainability information increasingly travels alongside the physical material itself.
While the precise regulatory landscape will continue to evolve, policy signals increasingly favour:
The common theme is clear. The market is moving toward feedstocks that minimise land-use impacts while delivering stronger greenhouse gas reductions. For businesses participating in renewable fuel markets, understanding feedstock eligibility is no longer optional.
It directly influences:
Understanding which feedstocks qualify is only part of the challenge. Once a feedstock enters a supply chain, its sustainability characteristics must be preserved, transferred, and verified across multiple companies and transactions. This is where mass balance accounting, sustainability declarations, certification systems, and chain-of-custody controls become critical.
Without these systems, it would be impossible to demonstrate that a renewable fuel genuinely originated from the feedstock claimed.
Continue Reading: Mass Balance, Traceability, and ISCC: The Data Behind RTFC Claims
← Previous: UK RTFO Explained: How Renewable Fuels Are Incentivized in the UK
→ Next: Mass Balance, Traceability, and ISCC: The Data Behind RTFC Claims
The UK’s Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) has evolved far beyond a simple renewable fuel mandate. Today, the value of a renewable fuel is determined not only by the fuel itself but also by the sustainability characteristics of the feedstock used to produce it. Concepts such as feedstock eligibility, indirect land-use change (ILUC), and double counting have reshaped renewable fuel markets by creating stronger incentives for waste- and residue-derived fuels.
As a result, feedstocks like used cooking oil have become highly valuable commodities across global supply chains. However, generating RTFC value requires more than simply using an eligible feedstock. Businesses must also demonstrate robust sustainability compliance, traceability, and documentation throughout the supply chain. As the RTFO continues to prioritize advanced and low-impact feedstocks through 2032 and beyond, understanding feedstock eligibility will remain essential for producers, traders, suppliers, and certification stakeholders operating in renewable fuel markets.
Double counting allows certain qualifying renewable fuels produced from approved waste and residue feedstocks to generate additional RTFCs compared with conventional fuel pathways.
Used cooking oil is generally considered a waste feedstock and aligns with the RTFO’s objective of encouraging renewable fuels that avoid competition with food production.
No. Eligibility depends on regulatory definitions, feedstock classification, and supporting evidence.
ILUC refers to land-use changes that may occur indirectly when increased demand for biofuel feedstocks drives agricultural expansion elsewhere.
Yes. Feedstock classification can significantly influence RTFC generation and therefore the economic value associated with a renewable fuel transaction.
Additional incentives only work if feedstock claims can be verified. Documentation helps demonstrate that a material genuinely qualifies for the treatment being claimed.
Once feedstock eligibility has been established, businesses must still manage traceability, sustainability declarations, certification requirements, and mass balance accounting throughout the supply chain.
