Sugarcane ethanol: Contributions to climate change - BAFF

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 9 Table 1. Import tariffs on bioethanol 1 . Country Import tariff US 2.5% + extra US$ 14 cents/litre (46% ad valorem) EU € 19.2/hl (63% ad valorem) Canada 4.92 US$ cent/litre Brazil 2 20% Argentina 20% China 30% Thailand 30% India 186% on undenatureated alcohol Source: adapted from Dufey et al. (2007b) 1 Undenaturated alcohol. 2 Temporarily lifted in February 2006. On the other hand, the planning of an export-oriented bioethanol industry based on the rationale of preferential market access is a risky strategy. As Box 5 suggests for Pakistan, trade preferences can be withdrawn at any time with devastating e�ects on the industry. Subsidies is another key concern. In industrialised countries, government support for the domestic production of energy crops, the processing or commercialisation of biofuels seems to be the rule (Dufey, 2006). Amounts involved are enormous. In the United States, Koplow (2006) estimated that subsidies to the biofuels industry to be between US$ 5.5 billion and US$ 7.3 billion a year. In the European Union, Kutas and Lindberg (2007) estimated that total support to bioethanol amounted € 0.52/litre. �e impacts these policies have on the developing countries competitiveness and on their potential for poverty reduction needs to be understood as domestic support in these countries is likely to be very limited. Moreover, subsidies impacts on environmental sustainability are also questionable as they promote bioethanol industries based on the less e�cient energy crops and with the least greenhouse gases reductions such as maize and wheat (Dufey, 2006). �e proliferation of di�erent technical, environmental and social standards and regulations for biofuels – without a system for mutual recognition – cause additional di�culties. For instance, at present not all biofuels are perceived as ‘sustainable’ especially those coming from overseas. As a consequence, several initiatives towards the development of sustainability certi�cation for both bioethanol and biodiesel have started. Some of them are led by governments (e.g. the United Kingdom, Netherlands and the European Union); others by 218 Sugarcane ethanol
Impacts of sugarcane bioethanol towards the Millennium Development Goals Box 5. The elimination of Pakistan from the EU GSP. Until recently, Pakistan was the second largest industrial alcohol exporter to the EU after Brazil, under the General System of Preferences (GSP). In May 2005, the Commission of Industrial Ethanol Producers of the EU (CIEP) accused Pakistan and Guatemala (the largest duty free exporters for the period 2002-2004) of dumping ethyl alcohol in the EU market, causing material harm to domestic producers. The Commission dropped proceedings a year later when full custom tariffs were restored on Pakistani imports. Later, following a complaint lodged by India at the World Trade Organization (WTO), a panel concluded that by granting tariff preferences to 12 countries under this special arrangement the EU was violating GATT/WTO preferential treatment obligations. The EU consequently removed Pakistan from the GSP. In the revised GSP regime, the anti-drug system has been replaced by GSP Plus, for which Pakistan does not qualify. Elimination of Pakistan from the GSP had devastating effects on the local industry. Distilleries begun to suffer important losses and some had no option but to cease operations. Whilst between 2002 and 2003, the number of distilleries in the country increased from 6 to 21, the more stringent EU tariff measures together with a rise in molasses exports, the distilleries were soon running idle capacities. Currently, at least 2 distilleries have shut down, with another 5 contemplating that option. Source: adapted from Rafi Khan et al. (2007). NGOs (e.g. WWF); and also by Universities (e.g. Lausanne University). �ese schemes tend to focus on traditional environmental and social aspects of feedstocks production, with several of them including greenhouse emission issues and with some few of them expanding to food security concerns. Although environmental and social assurance is needed in the industry, where these schemes are developed by importing nations, with little participation by producing country stakeholders, insu�cient re�ection of the producing countries’ environmental and social priorities and without mutual recognition between them, they are bound to constitute signi�cant trade barriers. Moreover, the experience with assurance schemes in the agriculture and forestry sector indicates that the complex procedures and high costs usually associated with them have regressive e�ects in detriment of small and poorest producers in developing countries. All in all, sustainability standards for bioethanol trade are to become more and more important. Countries wanting to bene�t from bioethanol exports need to invest in the development of robust and credible certi�cation systems that satisfy importing countries requirements. Overall, it is widely agreed that developing countries would bene�t from enhanced bioethanol trade and therefore the need to eliminate trade barriers. Sugarcane ethanol 219
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 200 and 201: Chapter 9 �e highest impact on po
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 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?