Sugarcane ethanol: Contributions to climate change - BAFF

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 9 �e highest impact on poverty reduction is likely to occur where sugarcane bioethanol focuses on local consumption, involving the participation and ownership of small farmers in the production and processing (FAO, 2007; Dufey et al., 2007b) and where processing facilities are near to the cultivation �elds. 2.5. Product diversification and value added International sugarcane market is one of the most distorted markets. It is highly protected, in general countries manage to negotiate quotas, a limited access to di�erent markets, and because it is a commodity, it has important price �uctuations (Murillo, 2007). In this context, sugarcane bioethanol is an opportunity to promote agricultural diversi�cation leaving producers in a more favourable situation to deal with changes in prices and other market �uctuations. In Brazil, for instance, besides the pursue of enhanced energy security, the government promoted the PROALCOOL programme in order to deal with the fall in international sugar prices preventing thus the industry of having idle capacity (FAO, 2007). Moreover, the production of both sugar and bioethanol gives the Brazilian industry �exibility in responding to the changing pro�tability of sugar and bioethanol production worldwide. In most cases, sugar and bioethanol are produced in the same mills (Bolling and Suarez, 2001). Sugarcane bioethanol can also reduce vulnerability through diversi�cation. �e changes in the European Union’s sugar regime will imply that many African, Caribbean and Paci�c countries will see their market access preferences eroded generating negative impacts on poverty levels. In the Caribbean, for instance, the associated possible loss of export revenues is expected to be 40 percent with a heavy contraction in the industry. �e resulting sugar surpluses therefore could be accommodated for biofuels production thus helping the industry to diversify, avoiding or mitigating the expected contraction (E4Tech, 2006). Another element to consider is the fact that sugarcane bioethanol production provides value added to sugarcane production. For instance, Murillo (2007) notes for Costa Rica that if the molasses and sugar producers substitute their production by those of bioethanol the price received would be much more than what they would get if they were to continue producing molasses or sugar for the surplus market. 2.6. Export opportunities Although at present very little bioethanol enter the international market (about 10%), international trade is expected to expand rapidly, as the global increase in consumption (especially countries in the North) will not coincide geographically with the scaling up of production (countries in the South) (Dufey, 2006). �e geographical mismatch between global supply and demand represents an opportunity for countries with signi�cant cost advantages 204 Sugarcane ethanol
Impacts of sugarcane bioethanol towards the Millennium Development Goals in sugarcane production to develop new export markets and to increase their export revenues. �ese are invariably developing countries in tropical and semitropical areas. Brazil, the main global bioethanol exporter, increased its exports considerably over the last few years and today supplies about 50 percent of international demand. (Dufey et al., 2007b). �e Brazilian government expects that by 2015 about 20 percent of the national production to be exported (Ministerio da Agricultura et al., 2006). Countries from the Caribbean Basin Initiative are developing export-oriented sugarcane bioethanol industries taking advantage of preferential market access provided by the trade agreement with the United States. Other exporters include Peru, Zimbabwe and China. As them other Latin American, African and East Asian countries are exploring the bene�ts of export-oriented sugarcane bioethanol sectors. In absence of trade distorting policies and where e�ective distributional and social policies are supportive, the development of a successful sugarcane bioethanol export-oriented industry could e�ectively reduce poverty. 2.7. Reduced greenhouse gas emissions At present global warming is considered one of the key global threats facing the humanity (Stern, 2006). Biofuels alleged reduced greenhouse gas emissions compared to fossil fuels are one of the main policy rationales for their promotion especially in Northern countries. �ere are two ways in which biofuels can reduce carbon emissions. First, over their life cycle, biofuels absorb and release carbon from the atmospheric pool without adding to the overall pool (in contrast to fossil fuels). Second, they displace use of fossil fuels (Kartha, 2006). However, biofuels production does, in most cases, involve consumption of fossil fuels. Compared to other types of liquid biofuels and under certain circumstances, Brazilian sugarcane bioethanol and second generation biofuels show the higher reductions in greenhouse gas emissions relative to standard fuels. IEA (2004) estimates that greenhouse emissions from sugarcane bioethanol in Brazil are 92 percent lower than standard fuel, while wheat bioethanol points to reductions ranging from 19 percent to 47 percent and reductions from sugar beet bioethanol vary between 35 percent and 53 percent. In addition to Brazil’s exceptional natural conditions in terms of high soil productivity and that most sugarcane crops are rain fed, a key factor behind its great greenhouse emissions performance is that nearly all conversion plants’ processing energy is provided by ‘bagasse’ (the remains of the crushed cane a�er the juice has been extracted). �is means energy needs from fossil fuel are zero and the surplus bagasse is even used for electricity co-generation. In 2003, Brazil avoided 5.7 million tonnes CO 2 equivalent due to the use of bagasse in sugar production (Macedo, 2005). Moreover, new developments in the sector such as the commercial application of lignocelulosic technology that will allow the use of bagasse for bioethanol production and Sugarcane ethanol 205
Page 1 and 2:
Sugarcane ethanol Contributions to
Page 3 and 4:
Table of contents Foreword 11 José
Page 5:
Chapter 8 �e global impacts of US
Page 8 and 9:
Foreword �e use of biofuels as a
Page 11 and 12:
Executive summary Do biofuels help
Page 13 and 14:
Executive summary 12. Projections o
Page 15 and 16:
Chapter 1 Introduction to sugarcane
Page 17 and 18:
Introduction to sugarcane ethanol A
Page 19 and 20:
Introduction to sugarcane ethanol C
Page 21 and 22:
Introduction to sugarcane ethanol F
Page 23:
Introduction to sugarcane ethanol H
Page 26 and 27:
Chapter 2 Production (million tons)
Page 28 and 29:
Chapter 2 Table 2. Sugarcane produc
Page 30 and 31:
Chapter 2 Harvested area (million h
Page 32 and 33:
Chapter 2 million hectares 8 7 6 5
Page 34 and 35:
Chapter 2 Table 5. Global significa
Page 36 and 37:
Chapter 2 (FAOSTAT, 2008). �e lan
Page 38 and 39:
Chapter 2 indicating that sugarcane
Page 40 and 41:
Chapter 2 and vinasse produced duri
Page 42 and 43:
Chapter 2 • • • • Harvested
Page 44 and 45:
Chapter 2 2.2. AEZ assessment of la
Page 46 and 47:
Chapter 2 The quantified descriptio
Page 48 and 49:
Chapter 2 Table 8 summarizes by reg
Page 50 and 51:
Chapter 2 Table 9. Suitability of u
Page 52 and 53:
Chapter 2 Table 10. Suitability of
Page 54 and 55:
Chapter 2 of bio-diversity and land
Page 56 and 57:
Chapter 2 FAO, 1987. 1948-1985 Worl
Page 58 and 59:
Chapter 2 Smeets, E., M. Junginger,
Page 60 and 61:
Chapter 3 Considering that this deb
Page 62 and 63:
Chapter 3 1,000 ha 9,000 8,000 7,00
Page 64 and 65:
Chapter 3 Another source of data on
Page 66 and 67:
Chapter 3 Figure 3. Different land
Page 68 and 69:
Chapter 3 1-Pastureand crops expans
Page 70 and 71:
Chapter 3 Given that the model is u
Page 72 and 73:
Chapter 3 to the case studies; (d)
Page 74 and 75:
Chapter 3 Mato Grosso do Sul in 200
Page 76 and 77:
Chapter 3 the Pasture class increas
Page 78 and 79:
Chapter 3 Table 5. Number of sugarc
Page 80 and 81:
Chapter 3 of 12.6% from 2001 to 200
Page 82 and 83:
Chapter 3 Table 6. South-Centre: ex
Page 84 and 85:
Chapter 3 4.5. Options for approach
Page 86 and 87:
Chapter 3 states that have lost pas
Page 88 and 89:
Chapter 3 It is important to contex
Page 91 and 92:
Chapter 4 Mitigation of GHG emissio
Page 93 and 94:
Table 1. Basic data: sugarcane prod
Page 95 and 96:
Mitigation of GHG emissions using s
Page 97 and 98:
GHG emission (kg CO 2 eq/m 3 etOH)
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Table 7. Soil carbon content for di
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
5. Conclusions Mitigation of GHG em
Page 107:
Page 110 and 111:
Chapter 5 Oil reserves - Gasoline/d
Page 112 and 113:
Chapter 5 in research and developme
Page 114 and 115:
Chapter 5 Table 3. Summary of main
Page 116 and 117:
Chapter 5 3. Environmental indicato
Page 118 and 119:
Chapter 5 Table 4. Carbon stock in
Page 120 and 121:
Chapter 5 3.2. Water Total carbon i
Page 122 and 123:
Chapter 5 3.3. Soil and fertilizers
Page 124 and 125:
Chapter 5 3.4. Management of diseas
Page 126 and 127:
Chapter 5 Table 10. Sugarcane and v
Page 128 and 129:
Chapter 5 in the implementation of
Page 130 and 131:
Chapter 5 Table 11. Continued. Crit
Page 132 and 133:
Chapter 5 Brazilian Government. Lei
Page 134 and 135:
Chapter 5 São Paulo State Governme
Page 136 and 137:
Chapter 6 2. Development of the eth
Page 138 and 139:
Chapter 6 blends by car manufacture
Page 140 and 141:
Chapter 6 Brazil have been roughly
Page 142 and 143:
Chapter 6 Overall there are few di
Page 144 and 145:
Chapter 6 3.2.1. The impact of exis
Page 146 and 147:
Chapter 6 �e use of ethanol in he
Page 148 and 149:
Chapter 6 cropping systems that pro
Page 150 and 151: Chapter 6 certainty, the supply of
Page 152 and 153: Chapter 6 De Vries, B.J.M., D.P. va
Page 155 and 156: Chapter 7 Biofuel conversion techno
Page 157 and 158: Biofuel conversion technologies �
Page 159 and 160: Biofuel conversion technologies In
Page 161 and 162: Biofuel conversion technologies the
Page 163 and 164: Biofuel conversion technologies Imp
Page 165 and 166: Biofuel conversion technologies Pro
Page 167 and 168: Investment costs (Euro/kWth input c
Page 169 and 170: 4.2. Greenhouse gas balances Biofue
Page 171 and 172: Reduction in CO equivalent emission
Page 173 and 174: Biofuel conversion technologies �
Page 175 and 176: Biofuel conversion technologies pot
Page 177 and 178: Chapter 8 The global impacts of US
Page 179 and 180: The global impacts of US and EU bio
Page 187 and 188: Table 1. Change in output due to EU
Page 191 and 192: Forest cover Pasture cover USEU 201
Page 193: The global impacts of US and EU bio
Page 196 and 197: Chapter 9 also risks and serious tr
Page 198 and 199: Chapter 9 Box 2. Bioethanol stoves
Page 202 and 203: Chapter 9 the increased generation
Page 204 and 205: Chapter 9 o�ers to support the MD
Page 206 and 207: Chapter 9 Price variation (%) 14 12
Page 208 and 209: Chapter 9 Dufey et al., 2007a). Leg
Page 210 and 211: Chapter 9 manufactured directly fro
Page 212 and 213: Chapter 9 in mechanical aid for the
Page 214 and 215: Chapter 9 Table 1. Import tariffs o
Page 216 and 217: Chapter 9 3.8. Improving efficiency
Page 218 and 219: Chapter 9 some minimum transport in
Page 220 and 221: Chapter 9 IEA, 2004. Biofuels for T
Page 223 and 224: Chapter 10 Why are current food pri
Page 225 and 226: Why are current food prices so high
Page 227 and 228: 2.4 Long-term drivers of supply Why
Page 229 and 230: 3.1. Effects on the supply side Why
Page 231 and 232: 3.3 Policy responses to rising food
Page 233 and 234: 3.4. Other effects • Why are curr
Page 235 and 236: - - - - Why are current food prices
Page 237 and 238: 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 5. The fut
Page 239 and 240: • • • Why are current food pr
Page 241 and 242: 6.1. Policy implications Why are cu
Page 243: Why are current food prices so high
Page 247 and 248: Authors Dr. Marcos Adami, senior re
Page 249 and 250: Keyword index A Africa 204, 205, 20
Page 251:
M maize 20, 83, 104, 173, 184, 187,
show all

Sugarcane ethanol: Contributions to climate change - BAFF

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?