Sugarcane ethanol: Contributions to climate change - BAFF

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 3 Mato Grosso do Sul in 2008 when the Pasture and Agriculture classes took place over 55.4 and 44.5% of the sugarcane expansion, respectively. For the analyzed states in this section it was veri�ed that the Agriculture class decreased its contribution of displaced area for sugarcane expansion from 69.3% in 2007 to 62.2% in 2008. Conversely the Pasture class increased its contribution from 29.4% in 2007 to 37% in 2008 suggesting a trend of increasing sugarcane expansion over the Pasture class. In Minas Gerais, Goiás and Paraná more than 99% of the sugarcane expansion was observed over the classes of Agriculture and Pasture. In Mato Grosso do Sul, 2.41% (1,119 ha) of the area of sugarcane expansion took place over the Forest class in 2007; while in 2008 it was insigni�cant (61 ha). In the state of Mato Grosso the sugarcane expansion over the Forest class was 7.4% (1,892 ha) in 2007 and 7.8% (2,385 ha) in 2008. 4.1.2. Analysis for the period from 2005 to 2008 in the state of São Paulo Figure 6 shows the results for Pasture, Agriculture, Reforestation, Forest and Citrus classes which were displaced for the expansion of the sugarcane crop harvested for the �rst time from 2005 to 2008 in São Paulo State. During the analyzed period a sugarcane expansion of 1,810 million ha was observed. Pasture (53%; 960,000 ha) and Agriculture (44.6%; 808,000 ha) were responsible for 97.7% (1,768 million ha) of the change. About 2% (36,900 ha) of sugarcane expansion took place over the Citrus class and 0.31% (5,500 ha) over the Reforestation and Forest classes together. Based on the data shown in Figure 6 it is not possible to conclude that the Pasture class tends to increase its contribution in displaced area for sugarcane expansion in relation to the Agriculture class. Nevertheless in 2008 the Pasture class contribution is the largest (56.1%) and the Agriculture class is the smallest (40.6%) in the four analyzed years. 4.1.3. Analysis for the years of 2007 and 2008 in the South-Central region Figure 7 shows the results that refer to the classes of land use that were displaced for sugarcane expansion in the most relevant producing states of the South-Central region in 2007 and 2008. In both years, Pasture and Agriculture classes were together responsible for 98.1% of the total area displaced for sugarcane expansion (2,184 thousand ha). �e Pasture class was responsible for 45.4% (0.991 million ha) and the Agriculture class was responsible for 52.7% (1,152 thousand ha) of the displaced area for sugarcane (Table 3). About 1.3% of sugarcane expansion took place over the Citrus class (28,916 ha) and 0.58% (12,623 ha) over the Reforestation and Forest classes together (others in Figure 7). Figure 7 shows that the Agriculture class was more displaced than the Pasture class for sugarcane expansion; however, 78 Sugarcane ethanol
1,429 1% 8,997 1% 107,352 52% 321,119 51% 2005 2007 96,940 47% 304,625 48% 6,523 2% 19,919 3% 160,540 53% 371,262 56% 2006 2008 Prospects of the sugarcane expansion in Brazil 137,456 45% 268,633 41% citrus agriculture pasture Total expansion: 2005 205,958 2006 305,603 2007 636,814 2008 661,969 Figure 6. Area in hectares and percentages of the classes of land use that were displaced for sugarcane expansion in São Paulo State from 2005 to 2008. 8,997 1% 434,330 42% 2007 6,863 1% 571,810 56% 19,919 2% 556,703 48% 5,760 0% others citrus agriculture pasture Figure 7. Area in hectares and percentages of the classes of land use displaced for the expansion of sugarcane in the most relevant sugarcane producing states in the South-Central region in 2007 and 2008. Sugarcane ethanol 79 2008 579,821 50% Total expansion: 2007 1,022,000 2008 1,162,203
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 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 101 and 102: Table 7. Soil carbon content for di
Page 105 and 106: 5. Conclusions Mitigation of GHG em
Page 107: Mitigation of GHG emissions using s
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 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Table 1. Change in output due to EU
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Forest cover Pasture cover USEU 201
Page 193:
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 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?