Presentation on theme: "Land Use Change and Other Factors Affecting Climate Change Benefits of Sugarcane Ethanol in Brazil Brazilian Bioethanol Science and Technology Laboratory."— Presentation transcript:
Land Use Change and Other Factors Affecting Climate Change Benefits of Sugarcane Ethanol in Brazil Brazilian Bioethanol Science and Technology Laboratory (CTBE) Task 38 Brazilian National Team Leader Australia, November 25-26, 2013 Manoel Regis L.V. Leal
Contents LUC/ILUC issues – Origins – Impact assessments: uncertainties Sugarcane ethanol in Brazil – Countries emissions profile – Ways to control LUC
LUC and ILUC: Why Bother? It is required by RED, RFS2, LCFS and other legislations They can represent significant impacts on GHG emissions, biodiversity, food security, water balance and quality, soil organic matter (SOM)
What Causes LUC? Land available for ag-expansion without deforestation (previously cleared, underutilized) = 500 to 4000 million hectares (1) This circle size reflects 1500 Global land area impacts: [million hectares per year] – Fire = 330-430 (2) est. 380 – Dev./Urban exp. (1) = 1.5 – LUC bioenergy est. (3) = 0.2 too small to be visible (1) Enormous range due to pasture, grassland, marginal land estimates Sources: (1) Kline et al. 2009; calc. by author based on FAO 2007. (2) Giglio et al. 2010; Randerson 2013. (3) Tyner et al. 2010 (3 m ha total over 14 years = 0.2 M ha each year)
Where LUC GHG Emissions Come From? Source: Tipper, Hutchinson, Brander, 2009 LUC emissions from biofuels represent only 1% of the total!
Some Facts Although LUC emissions from biofuels can be significant in their LCA emissions, they represent only 1% of the global LUC emissions; Biofuels occupied only 0.5% (27 Mha) of the managed land in 2007 (1,500 Mha arable land plus 3,400 Mha of pasture) and 2% of the arable land in the world; ILUC GHG emissions calculations are still under hot debate.
LUC GHG Emissions (g CO 2 e/MJ) SourceMaize EthanolSoya Biodiesel Searchinger et al. (2008)156165-270 CARB (2009)4563 EPA (2010)4754 Hertel et al. (2010)40- Tyner et al. (2010)21- IFPRI MIRAGE (2010)5475 Source: EC COM (2010) 811 Final
Some Reasons For Differences Different assumptions and data base, low disaggregation levels; Different methodologies: co-products impacts, CGE/PE and allocation models, elasticities, yields, land price;
What Needs to Be Done? To reduce LUC/ILUC – Public policies to manage LU – Technology improvements to increase yields and reduce impacts To improve LUC/ILUC analysis – Continue to develop better models – Produce disaggregated data for the local conditions
Sugarcane Ethanol in Brazil Country’s LU Country’s GHG emissions inventory PP to reduce LUC and impacts Technology development GHG LCA
Brazilian GHG Inventory (2005) SectorGWP (Tg CO 2 e)Share (%) Energy328.815.0 Industry77.93.6 Agriculture415.818.9 Land use change and forest1,329.160.6 Waste treatment41.01.9 Total2,194.6100.0 Source: Brazil Second Communication to UNFCCC (MCT, 2010)
Main Public Policies National Plan of Climate Change (PNMC) Low Carbon Agriculture (ABC) Sugarcane Agroecological Zoning
Sugarcane Agroecological Zoning Source: EMBRAPA, 2009 64.5 Mha of land available for sugarcane planting with low impacts. It represents only 7.5% of Brazil total area
Technology Improvements to Reduce LUC Sugarcane breeding: conventional and GM; Low impact mechanization: reduce soil compaction and allow no-tillage planting; Crop management: precision agriculture, increase plant density, irrigation, N fixation. Goals: increase yields and reduce fossil energy use
October2002 Redução da Distância Entre Linhas Row spacing (m) Today (Brazil) Initial Target(CTBE)
Final Comments LUC is a critical issue for biofuels; The methods and data used to assess its impacts need to be highly improved; Biofuels LUC should be considered integrated with other LUC causes; the dynamics for deforestation and other causes need to be better understood and managed; Public Policies and technology development are important tools to reduce LUC impacts.