by Charlie Bartlett (The Loadstar) The IMO’s Intersessional Working Group on Greenhouse Gases (ISWG-GHG 18) has become an ideological battleground, with shipping lines taking a stance against crop biofuels, one of few alternatives to fossil fuels available today.
Activist group Transport & Environment (T&E) said today some 34 million hectares – an area the size of Germany – would be needed, along with the deforestation and enormous agricultural carbon emissions associated with that, to cultivate sufficient biofuel to decarbonise shipping.
But the issue is not inherent to the use of biofuels, T&E spokesperson Sam Hargreaves told The Loadstar. Rather, it was the lack of a distinction at the IMO between crop biofuels, like palm and soy oil, and waste-derived ones, like used cooking oil.
“The IMO’s ambition for 2050 is not a bad one at all, but without an exclusion [of crop biofuels], it’s a crazy idea.”
Interests pushing for crop biofuels include Brazil and Argentina, as well as Malaysia, the world’s biggest palm oil producer.
“At least at the EU level they have excluded food crops, animal fats – but there is no global agreement,” Mr Hargreaves explained.
...
A number of additional provisions must be in place if a switch to biofuels is to generate a real decrease in CO2 emissions. One of these has to do with how this biofuel is made. If production processes harness waste products, such as used cooking oil, agricultural run-off, and sewage, as feedstocks – the products of industrial and municipal processes which would occur at any rate – the fuels generated would be truly carbon-neutral.
Neither is shipping the only industry competing for the very limited feedstocks of waste-based biofuel.
“Used cooking oil is the only one where there’s a lot of availability,” confirmed Mr Hargreaves. “But if you compare it to the demand from aviation and shipping, the supply is not there.” READ MORE
Related articles
- Pushback campaign against biofuels launches at the IMO (Splash 24/7)
- Hapag-Lloyd, NABU: No place for ‘unsustainable’ biofuels in shipping’s future fuel mix (Offshore Energy)
- 69 NGOs urge IMO to exclude biofuels from Global Fuel Standard (Offshore Energy)
- NGOs Call For IMO to Exclude Biofuels from Global Fuel Standard (Ship & Bunker)
- Avoid Crop Biofuels in Decarbonization Push, Shippers Tell IMO (Bloomberg/RigZone)
- Shipping Giants Ask Watchdog to Avoid Biofuels in Green Push (Bloomberg/Yahoo! Finance)
- UN shipping body’s green fuels law could worsen the sector’s climate impact - study (Transportation & Environment)
- Shipping Industry Leaders Oppose Biofuel Use Amid Climate Concerns (Global Trade Magazine)
- Biofuels' net GHG emissions could be double traditional fuels' without IMO policy changes (Riviera)
- CAPPA, 68 NGOs Urge International Maritime Organisation To Exclude Biofuels From Global Fuel Standard (Nigerian Current)
- Shipping companies push against crop-based biofuels (Euractiv)
- Small group of shippers, NGOs urges IMO to exclude marine biofuels made from soy, palm (Biobased Diesel Daily)
- Putting Rainforests Into Fuel Tanks? Groups Warn IMO Against Biofuel Disaster (Scoop)
- Clean energy: CSOs challenge IMO over biofuel plan to operate vessels (The Sun)
- Biofuels From Soy, Palm Oil Worse For Emissions Than Fossil Diesel – NGOs Warn (The Will)
- Global NGOs Call On International Maritime Org To Reject Biofuels And Commit To Truly Clean Energy (Global Forest Coalition/Scoop World)
- Environmental Groups Urge IMO to Reject Biofuels in Shipping (Biofuel Watch/Nautical Voice)
- Coalition sounds alarm on biofuel risks to food security, deforestation, others (B&FT Online)
-
Biofuels vs. food? EXCLUSIVE: Brazilian industry and scientists go to IMO to respond to accusations against biofuels (eixos (Google Translation))
-
Biofuels as an immediate and effective solution for decarbonization of transportation – Factsheet (BIOEN)
-
Brazil tries to push through alternative proposal for carbon tax on ships: Brazil and the EU duel to define routes to decarbonize maritime transport (eixos (Google Translation))
-
Barriers against biofuels mobilize BRICS -- Brazil, Indonesia and India could be important suppliers of sustainable fuels for aviation and maritime transport (exios (Google Translation))
-
Hydrogen in focus: Brazil's IMO plea could be an obstacle to green hydrogen -- The country can, and should, seek to expand its bioenergy market, but without missing the opportunity to lead the transition to sustainable fuels (exios (Google Translation))
Excerpt from Splash 24/7: Hapag-Lloyd and Louis Dreyfus Armateurs are among a host of shipping lines and organisations initiating a big pushback campaign today against the growing use of biofuels in shipping, warning that an area the size of Germany would need to be recultivated to meet potential projected growth of this alternative marine fuel.
The eighteenth Intersessional Working Group on Greenhouse Gases (ISWG-GHG 18) starts its meeting at the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) today, discussing regulatory measures to enable the shipping industry to become net zero by 2050.
Determined to push back against the rise in biofuel use, many NGOs and shipping lines have come out in force today arguing that the majority of biofuels produced now from food crop-based feedstocks come with direct and indirect deforestation, and many other sustainability issues ranging from water scarcity to food security.
“Unless legally-binding safeguards are introduced, there is a risk that a large amount of fossil fuels will be replaced with unsustainable biofuels,” signatories to one campaign that also include Hoegh Autoliners argue in an open letter sent to the IMO.
Nearly a third of global shipping could run on biofuels in 2030, new analysis from NGO Transport & Environment (T&E) shows, up from less than 1% today.
The study by Cerulogy on behalf of T&E shows that palm and soy oil would likely make up nearly two-thirds of the biodiesel used to power the shipping industry in 2030 as they represent the cheapest fuels to comply. This poses a serious climate problem, warns T&E, as palm and soy are responsible for two to three times more carbon emissions than even the dirtiest shipping fuels today, once deforestation and land clearance are taken into account.
The fuel-intensive shipping industry would need vast amounts of farmland. 34m hectares in 2030 – the total area of Germany – will be needed to produce enough crops to meet the increased biofuels demand from the shipping industry.
When the EU decided to encourage the use of biofuels in 2009, the consumption of palm oil-based biofuels doubled between 2010 and 2020, reaching close to a third of EU biofuels use. Scientific evidence later demonstrated that 45% of palm oil expansion happened at the expense of carbon rich ecosystems like forests or peatlands over that same period. Similar findings have been uncovered for other crop-based feedstock such as soy.
Evidence on the negative impacts has prompted countries such as France, Norway, the Netherlands, and others to restrict or stop palm and soy-based biofuels in domestic use. Europe has also decided to exclude the use of feed- and food-based biofuels from its flagship shipping fuels regulation (FuelEU).
Signatories have called on the IMO and member states to discourage the use of crop-based biofuels by ships and to consider the excluding crop-based biofuels from the eligibility list for compliance with existing and future MARPOL Annex VI regulations.
Signatories argued that with biofuels, the industry risks deploying a cure worse than the disease to address shipping’s climate impact.
Constance Dijkstra, shipping manager at T&E, said: “Fuelling cargo ships with deforestation is a terrible idea. Burning crops for fuel is bad for the planet and bad for global food security. The IMO should consider the climate impact of bad biofuels to avoid doing more harm than good.”
A separate letter sent to the IMO today – led by Biofuelwatch and the Global Forest Coalition – has addressed similar concerns.
In April the IMO will finalise new climate rules for shipping to try to phase out fossil fuels with a global fuel standard (GFS) likely to be implemented which could either speed up shipping’s transition to renewable energy, or see the industry become a large demand sector for biofuels.
An influential proposal from Brazil risks replacing fossil fuels with biofuels, which raises serious concerns among conservation groups about the potential environmental and food security impacts of this plan.
According to a recent submission to the IMO by T&E, biofuels could make up almost half (44%) of shipping’s energy demand by 2035, most of which will derive from food- and feed-based crops (soy and palm oil), unless the fuel standard is carefully designed to exclude these categories.
Biofuelwatch mobilised a similar warning on aviation a few years ago. Now, sensing a new potential danger, the NGO is worried that shipping could make the same, or even bigger mistake.
While many shipping companies have embraced recycled vegetable oil as an alternative fuel, campaigners have hit out at this too arguing that wastes and residues, including animal fats, are in limited supply and existing demand far exceeds their availability. Furthermore, many of those residues and wastes have high indirect greenhouse gas emissions, due to competition between biofuels and other uses.
Analysis from T&E shows a 20,000 teu boxship travelling between China and Brazil would alone require the yearly waste oil from more than 2,000 McDonald’s restaurants, while to run it on animal fats would require over 1m pigs. READ MORE
Excerpt from Offshore Energy: However, at the global level, no such restrictions are proposed. The letter calls for the IMO to exclude crop-based biofuels from regulatory compliance and ensure that crop-based biofuels do not benefit from economic incentives directed towards promoting zero and near-zero emission fuels.
As per T&E, a clear definition of what constitutes a ‘zero’ and ‘near zero’ emission fuel is needed. This would exclude deforestation-linked biofuels, cap food-based biofuels and incentivize green e-fuels made from green hydrogen. READ MORE
Excerpt from Offshore Energy: In July 2023, the IMO adopted the Revised Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Strategy committing to net-zero GHG emissions by around 2050. One of the key policies to achieve this target is the Global Fuel Standard (GFS), which aims to incentivize the use of clean energy on ships. The IMO promised to finalize the standard in April 2025 through a series of meetings to be held in London over the coming three months, beginning with a key discussion on February 17-21.
...
“The design of the Global Fuel Standard should be based on stringent life cycle assessment guidelines that exclude the use of biofuels while protecting the climate, the environment, and people’s livelihoods.”
Biofuelwatch, GFC and the other signatories to the letter called on the IMO to exclude biofuels from the GFS and prioritize ‘real’ solutions to climate change, including demand reduction, efficiency improvements, and adoption of advanced propulsion technologies such as wind-assisted technologies and electrification.
The letter also called on the IMO to implement stringent life cycle assessment guidelines that protect ecosystems and human livelihoods.
...
Brazil, the world’s second-largest biofuel producer behind the United States, has proposed biofuels as a long-term solution for shipping.
...
By excluding biofuels from the GFS, the IMO can align with its climate commitments and safeguard global ecosystems and communities, GFC and Biofuelwatch added, urging all IMO Member States to reject biofuels and commit to clean energy solutions that prioritize environmental sustainability and social justice. READ MORE
Excerpt from Biobased Diesel Daily: Proponents of soy-based biofuels argue that the theory of indirect land-use change (ILUC) espoused by opponents of crop-based biofuels is flawed, and that actual, scientific real-word data show the claims made about soy-based biofuels and deforestation are false.
ILUC theory from two decades ago did not take into account the productivity and efficiency improvements enabled by modern precision agriculture adopted by farmers over the past 20 years.
Last year, eight lifecycle-analysis scientists submitted an amicus brief for U.S. litigation regarding the Renewable Fuel Standard that indicated ILUC theory is not consistently supported by scientific evidence.
“Research based on misclassifications of land use and flawed assumptions and methodologies spurred skepticism about the environmental and GHG-emission reduction benefits of biofuels, but that research has since been disproven,” the brief stated.
...
In 2023, the IMO agreed to a new climate strategy that includes reaching net-zero greenhouse-gas (GHG) emissions “by or around, i.e., close to, 2050.”
In the meantime, the IMO has set the target of cutting emissions by 20 percent to 30 percent by 2030 and 70 percent to 80 percent by 2040, against 2008 levels.
A key part of this is the Global Fuel Standard, which would force ships to reduce their GHG emissions by switching to cleaner, alternative fuels. READ MORE
Excerpt from B&FT Online: A coalition of climate-focused organisations has raised concerns over the push for biofuels in international shipping, warning that its adoption under new climate measures could exacerbate food insecurity, deforestation and human rights violations.
Despite ongoing discussions on decarbonising the shipping industry, the three-member coalition comprising Biofuelwatch (UK), the Global Forest Coalition (US) and AbibiNsroma Foundation (Ghana) noted that little progress has been made in addressing these risks.
They pointed to the talks that happened last February (ISWG-GHG-17) which did not bring concrete improvements to the discussion around biofuels.
They caution that large-scale biofuel production could drive up food prices, threaten forest ecosystems and displace vulnerable communities.
...
“If global demand for biofuels rises to meet the needs of major industries like international shipping, the consequences for countries like Ghana could be devastating. Increased pressure on land for biofuel feedstock – such as cassava, sorghum and sugarcane – risks exacerbating land-grabbing, threatening food security and straining local livelihoods,” Kenneth Nana Amoateng of AbibiNsroma Foundation said.
“A truly clean energy transition must prioritise sustainability and renewable energy, protect vulnerable communities and avoid replicating the environmental and social injustices of fossil fuels,” he added.
Amos Yesutanbul of FIDEP Foundation also argued that: “Green energy should never come at the cost of human dignity. In Ghana, large-scale biofuel plantations – including Jatropha cultivation – are displacing smallholder farmers, reducing food production and increasing poverty.”
...
During the last IMO talks (MEPC82, ISWG-GHG-17 and ISWG-GHG-18), Brazil has been promoting the future fuel-to-power shipping to be biofuels, supported by Argentina, Ecuador and Indonesia. Corn and cassava have been pointed out as possible feedstocks for industrialised biofuel production in Ghana.
However, these crops are considered staple foods and diverting them from their regular use might lead to food insecurity. First-generation biofuels, like the ones above, are known to have catastrophic effects on deforestation, land rights, water and fertiliser consumption and food security, especially in Global South countries.
According to a recent report by Transport & Environment, if no standards are applied biofuels could make up 36 percent of global shipping energy demand in 2030 – most of which will be derived from soy and palm oil.
Second-generation biofuels are also not a solution: their limited scalability and availability, as well as their connection to fraud risk, make them far from being a long-term solution for international shipping and its green transition.
“If the path to sustainability forces communities off their land and threatens their survival, then it is not truly sustainable. We must ensure that clean energy solutions empower people, respect land rights and protect the livelihoods of those who depend on agriculture.” READ MORE
Excerpt from eixos (Google Translation): "There is no biofuels versus food dilemma," says researcher who has compiled scientific papers on the subject -- Representatives of the biofuel industry and Brazilian scientists will present this Thursday afternoon (10/4, 2025), in London, a compilation of international studies to counter criticism, especially from Europe, of first-generation products based on crops such as sugarcane, corn and soybeans.
The presentation takes place at a parallel event to the meetings of the International Maritime Organization (IMO), where a mechanism will be defined for the decarbonization of ships by 2050.
The mechanism will be mandatory for international freight and aims to make new fuels based on renewable hydrogen viable to replace fossil fuels .
The Brazilian government is trying to ensure that biofuels such as ethanol and biodiesel are also recognized within the range of solutions, but faces resistance from Europe.
The work led by USP professor and coordinator of the Fapesp Bioenergy Research program, Glaucia Souza , provides support for the Brazilian delegation at the IMO, as it counters one of the main criticisms of ethanol and biodiesel: competition with food production .
“We are providing evidence that biofuel production does not compete with food production,” says the researcher, who is also the leader of the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Task Force on Decarbonizing Transport with Biofuels.
“When we started looking at this issue of biofuel competition with food production, we discovered that there is no correlation, this discourse is not scientifically based. It is not a dilemma,” he highlights in an interview with the Axis agency .
According to Souza, when reviewing the literature on the topic based on a statistical analysis comparing scientific articles, the research discovered that the correlations made with food security are based on modeling, without observation of real data.
“When people say that biofuels impact food production, it’s usually a modeling exercise, not an observation of real data. It’s not about going out and checking things out in the world, with your feet on the ground. So what I did was present the Brazilian agricultural model, because many countries don’t know about it.”
The compilation of more than 80 scientific studies that are being submitted to the IMO is reviewed by people linked to the vegetable oil, biodiesel, green diesel and ethanol industries, and the government, including Commander Flávio Mathuiy, advisor to the Coordinating Commission for IMO Affairs. Read the full text
Mobilization of the Global South
For Souza, the lack of knowledge about the Brazilian agricultural production model and the investments that are made to reduce the impact in the field harm the country in carbon accounting in international forums.
“We have practices that the world doesn’t know about, so we need to publicize this, because when [they] do the math, we always come out on the losing end.”
She explains that part of the compilation originated from the study that the task force presented to the G20 last year, with the carbon accounting of biofuel production. And it comes from a need to demonstrate that countries in the Global South can contribute significantly to the net zero trajectory of shipping.
“These are emerging countries, with booming economies and enormous potential for biofuel production, that are not yet doing so. The idea is: in countries that are already producing biofuel, for example, Latin America, to calculate how to double it. In countries that do not produce, but already have cultivation and a vocation for agriculture, to show a possibility”, he comments.
The focus is on fuels with scale: ethanol from sugarcane and corn, biodiesel and green diesel (HVO). In the scientist's view, there is no point in talking about products that do not exist and do not have scale, and aviation is an example of this.
“There is a lot of research that is not being delivered in the necessary volume, especially for maritime and aviation transport, because it is not available. In Brazil, we are able to deliver products that can indeed help navigation.”
Brazil missed the flight, but can board the ships
The mobilization is an attempt to ensure that the specificities of Brazil and emerging countries in the Global South are taken into account in the IMO mechanism, avoiding agreements that will create new costs and sudden changes in the production and consumption of these markets based on the imposition of technologies from the North.
“The aviation industry organized itself first and took biofuels, and Brazil in general, a little off guard. So, when it determined the characteristics and requirements that it has as a basic premise, the European perspective predominated. Now, at the IMO, we are managing to come together before a decision is made,” comments Camilo Adas , director of Energy Transition at Be8 and one of the reviewers of the compilation.
The biofuel producer announced at the end of March a partnership with Vast, in Porto do Açu, in search of customers for biodiesel in maritime transport .
In an interview with the Axis agency , Adas, who is also part of the working group of the Ministry of Industry and Commerce (MDIC) for Energy Transition of the Naval Industry, assesses that Brazil learned its lesson from the international aviation scheme (Corsia) and has reorganized itself in the last four years to address the fair energy transition.
“We are showing an unprecedented example of industry, academia and the government itself, which officially represents Brazil at the IMO. We are addressing information not to defend an exclusive or geopolitical strategy, but to defend the energy transition in a socially fair and scalable way,” he says.
According to Adas, the objective of the work is to show that the entire Southern Cone can contribute to decarbonization, in contrast to the defense of specific technological routes that are not yet available on a large scale.
“Our main request is to allow everyone to participate. To allow an energy transition on a global basis, where the rules are global, but where each region can contribute what it has to offer, and not simply pre-define technological routes that only a group of industries may believe they want to develop,” he adds. READ MORE
Excerpt from BIOEN:
REFERENCES
General context of decarbonization of transportation using biofuels
1 Renewables 2018. Analysis and forecast to 2023. International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2018
2 IEA Net-zero Roadmap. 2023 update. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8ad619b9-17aa-473d-8a2f-4b90846f5c19/NetZeroRoadmap_AGlobalPathwaytoKeepthe1.5CGoalinReach-2023Update.pdf
3 IEA Net-zero Roadmap. 2023 update. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8ad619b9-17aa-473d-8a2f-4b90846f5c19/NetZeroRoadmap_AGlobalPathwaytoKeepthe1.5CGoalinReach-2023Update.pdf
4 https://www.gov.br/planalto/pt-br/media/18-11-2024-declaracao-de-lideres-g20.pdf
5 Carbon accounting for sustainable biofuels. 2024. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/carbon-accounting-for-sustainable-biofuels
6 Mohammadi, H. and Saddler, J. (2023). Implementation Agendas: Compare-and-Contrast Transport Biofuels Policies (2021-2023 Update). IEA Bioenergy Task 39. https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Implementation-Agendas-Compare-and-Contrast-Transport-Biofuels-Policies.pdf
7 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
8 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
9 https://www.iea.org/energy-system/low-emissions-fuels
11 Ahmed, S., Warne, T., Smith, E., Goemann, H., Linse, G., Greenwood, M., Kedziora, J., Sapp, M., Kraner, D., Roemer, K., Haggerty, J. H., Jarchow, M., Swanson, D., Poulter, B. and Stoy, P. C. (2021). Systematic review on effects of bioenergy from edible versus inedible feedstocks on food security. Science of Food (2021) 5:9; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-021-00091-6
12 Schulte, L. A., Dale, B. E., Bozzetto, S., Liebman, M., Souza, G. M., Haddad, N., … & Arbuckle, J. G. (2022). Meeting global challenges with regenerative agriculture producing food and energy. Nature Sustainability, 5(5), 384-388)
What is bioenergy
13 Souza, G. M., Victoria, R. L.; Joly, C. A.; Verdade, L. M. Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72. Page 555. https://bioenfapesp.org/scopebioenergy/images/chapters/bioenergy_sustainability_scope.pdf
14 IRENA (2024). Decarbonising hard-to-abate sectors with renewables: Perspectives for the G7. April 2024. https://www.irena.org/Publications/2024/Apr/Decarbonising-hard-to-abate- sectors-with-renewables-Perspectives-for-the-G7
15 IEA Net-zero Roadmap. 2023 update. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8ad619b9-17aa-473d-8a2f-4b90846f5c19/NetZeroRoadmap_AGlobalPathwaytoKeepthe1.5CGoalinReach-2023Update.pdf
What is bioenergy expected growth?
16 IEA Net-zero Roadmap. 2023 update. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8ad619b9-17aa-473d-8a2f-4b90846f5c19/NetZeroRoadmap_AGlobalPathwaytoKeepthe1.5CGoalinReach-2023Update.pdf
17 IEA Net-zero Roadmap. 2023 update. https://iea.blob.core.windows.net/assets/8ad619b9-17aa-473d-8a2f-4b90846f5c19/NetZeroRoadmap_AGlobalPathwaytoKeepthe1.5CGoalinReach-2023Update.pdf
18 IEA (2024), Renewables 2024, IEA, Paris. https://www.iea.org/reports/renewables-2024
Main biofuels in use in the world: biodiesel, ethanol and HVO
19 Cantarella, H. ; Leal-Silva, J. F.; Nogueira, L. A.; Maciel Filho, R.; Rossetto, R.; Ekbom, T.; Souza, G. M.; Mueller-Langer, F. (2023). Biofuel technologies: Lessons learned and pathways to decarbonization. Global Change Biology Bioenergy. 1-14. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/gcbb.13091
20 van Dyk, S.. Su, J., Saddler, J. (2024). Update on drop-in biofuel and co-processing commercialization
IEA Bioenergy: Task 39. ISBN# 979-12-80907-40-0. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/07/IEA-Bioenergy-Task-39-drop-in-biofuels-and-co-processing-report-June-2024.pdf
21 Canabarro, N.I.; Silva-Ortiz, P.; Nogueira, L.A.H.; Cantarella, H.; Maciel Filho, R.; Souza, G.M. (2023). Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 171: 113019. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122009005
23 https://www.cnnbrasil.com.br/economia/macroeconomia/empresas-fecham-acordo-para-testar-etanol-como-combustivel-para-transporte-maritimo/?utm_source=chatgpt.com & https://eixos.com.br/empresas/cmm-e-wartsila-vao-desenvolver-embarcacoes-de-apoio-movidas-a-etanol/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Main raw materials for biofuels in Brazil: sugarcane, corn, soybean, animal fat, and wheat
Biofuels production capacity
27 ANP (2025).Painel Dinâmico de Produtores de Etanol. https://www.gov.br/anp/pt-br/centrais-de-conteudo/paineis-dinamicos-da-anp/paineis-e-mapa-dinamicos-de-produtores-de-combustiveis-e-derivados/painel-dinamico-de-produtores-de-etanol
28 https://etanoldemilho.com.br/dados-setoriais/
29 https://etanoldemilho.com.br/dados-setoriais/
32 Canabarro, N.I.; Silva-Ortiz, P.; Nogueira, L.A.H.; Cantarella, H.; Maciel Filho, R.; Souza, G.M. (2023). Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 171: 113019. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122009005
33 Silva, J. F. L.; Cantarella, H.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Rossetto, R.; Maciel-Filho, R.; Souza, G. M. (2024). Biofuels in Emerging Markets of Africa and Asia. IEA Bioenergy, 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Emerging-Markets-Policy-Brief-pb2_v06.pdf & https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Biofuels-in-Emerging-Markets-Factsheet-G20.pdf
34 Cherubin, M. R.; Carvalho, J. L. N.; Cerri, C. E. P.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Souza, G. M.; Cantarella, H. (2021). Land Use and Management Effects on Sustainable Sugarcane-Derived Bioenergy. Land, 10,72. https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Release-English-Land-Use-in-Brazil-for-Task-45.pdf & https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/1/72
35 Osseweijer, P., Watson, H. K., Johnson, F. X., Batistella, M., Cortez, L. A. B., Lynd, L. R., Kaffka, S. R., Long, S. P., van Meijl, H., Nassar, A. M. and Woods, J. (2015). Bioenergy and Food Security in Souza, G. M.; Victoria, R. L.; Joly, C. A.; Verdade, L. M. Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72. Page 95. https://bioenfapesp.org/scopebioenergy/images/chapters/bioenergy_sustainability_scope.pdf
36 https://etanoldemilho.com.br/dados-setoriais/
38 Waclawovsky, A. J., Sato, P. M., Lembke, C. G., Moore, P. H., Souza, G. M. (2010). Sugarcane for bioenergy production: an assessment of yield and regulation of sucrose content. Plant Biotechnology Journal 8 (3), 263-276.
39 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
40 Enciso, S. R. A., Fellmann, T., Dominguez, I. P., Santini, F. (2016). Abolishing biofuel policies: Possible impacts on agricultural price levels, price variability and global food security. Food Policy 61, 9-26. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919216000166
41 Justus, M., Bachion, L. C., Arantes, S. M., Ramalho Moreira, M. M., & Rodrigues, L. (2024). Did the entry of the corn ethanol industry in Brazil affect the relationship between domestic and international corn prices? GCB Bioenergy, 16(9), e13181. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.13181
42 Gurgel, A. C., Seabra, J. E., Arantes, S. M., Moreira, M. M., Lynd, L. R., & Galindo, R. (2024). Contribution of double-cropped maize ethanol in Brazil to sustainable development. Nature Sustainability, 1-12.
Productive model of Brazilian tropical agriculture and its environmental and social benefits
43 Boletim Agro Sustentável. Edição 9 – Jun 2024. Embaixada do Brasil, Lisboa. https://ugc.production.linktr.ee/ed37ef0a-853a-4eee-8887-f3ebb175382f_AF-Boletim-Agro-Sustent-vel-edicao-9-JUN-2024.pdf
44 Embrapa. https://www.embrapa.br/car-2021/resultados
45 Gurgel, A. C., Seabra, J. E. A., Arantes, S. M., Moreira, M. M. R., Lynd, L. R. and Galindo, R. (2024). Contribution of double-cropped maize ethanol in Brazil to sustainable development. Nature Sustainability volume 7, 1429–1440. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-024-01424-5
46 Berndes, G., Youngs, H., Ballester, M. V. R., Cantarella, H., Cowie, A. L., Jewitt, G., Martinelli, L. A. and Neary, D. (2015). Soils and Water in Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72. Pages 619-659. https://bioenfapesp.org/scopebioenergy/images/chapters/bioenergy_sustainability_scope.pdf
47 Cherubin, M. R.; Carvalho, J. L. N.; Cerri, C. E. P.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Souza, G. M.; Cantarella, H. (2021). Land Use and Management Effects on Sustainable Sugarcane-Derived Bioenergy. Land, 10,72. https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Release-English-Land-Use-in-Brazil-for-Task-45.pdf & https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/1/72
48 Joly, C. A., Verdade, L. M., Huntley, B. J., Dale, V. H., Mace, G., Muok, B. and Ravindranath, N. H. (2015). Biofuel Impacts on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Souza, G. M.; Victoria, R. L.; Joly, C. A.; Verdade, L. M. Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72. Page 555. https://bioenfapesp.org/scopebioenergy/images/chapters/bioenergy_sustainability_scope.pdf
49 Guarenghi, M. M., Garofalo, D. F., Seabra, J. E., Moreira, M. M., Novaes, R. M., Ramos, N. P., … & de Andrade, C. A. (2023). Land use change net removals associated with sugarcane in Brazil. Land, 12(3), 584.
50 Guarenghi, M. M., Garofalo, D. F., Seabra, J. E., Moreira, M. M., Novaes, R. M., Ramos, N. P., … & de Andrade, C. A. (2023). Land use change net removals associated with sugarcane in Brazil. Land, 12(3), 584.
51 Hernandes T. A. D; et al., (2022). Implications of regional agricultural land use dynamics and deforestation associated with sugarcane expansion for soil carbono stocks in Brazil. Reg. Environ. Chang., 22, 49.
52 Moraes, M. A. F. D., Oliveira, F. C. R. and Diaz-Chavez, R. A. (2015). Socio-economic impacts of Brazilian sugarcane industry. Environ. Dev. 16,31-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVDEV.2015.06.010
53 Moraes, M. A. F. D., Bacchi, M. R. P. and Caldarelli, C. E. (2016). Accelerated growth of the sugarcane, sugar, and ethanol sectors in Brazil (2000–2008): Effects on municipal gross domestic product per capita in the south-central region. Biomass Bioenergy 91,116–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOMBIOE.2016.05.004
54 https://unicadata.com.br/listagem.php?idMn=158
55 BANCO NACIONAL DE DESENVOLVIMENTO ECONÔMICO E SOCIAL; CENTRO DE GESTÃO E ESTUDOS ESTRATÉGICOS (coord.). Bioethanol: fast track to mobility decarbonization: summary for policy makers. Rio de Janeiro: Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social, 2024. 40 p. http://web.bndes.gov.br/bib/jspui/handle/1408/25507
56 Moraes, M. A. F. D., Oliveira, F. C. R. and Diaz-Chavez, R. A. (2015). Socio-economic impacts of Brazilian sugarcane industry. Environ. Dev. 16,31-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENVDEV.2015.06.010
57 Moraes, M. A. F. D., Bacchi, M. R. P. and Caldarelli, C. E. (2016). Accelerated growth of the sugarcane, sugar, and ethanol sectors in Brazil (2000–2008): Effects on municipal gross domestic product per capita in the south-central region. Biomass Bioenergy 91,116–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BIOMBIOE.2016.05.004
58 https://unicadata.com.br/listagem.php?idMn=146
59 Martinez, D. M. and Ebenhack, B. W. (2008). Understanding the role of energy consumption in human development through the use of saturation phenomena. Energy Policy 36, 1430-1435
Production potential for reuse of degraded land and expansion of bioenergy into pastureland
60 FAO. 2024. Land statistics 2001–2022 – Global, regional and country trends. FAOSTAT Analytical Briefs, No. 88. Rome.
https://doi.org/10.4060/cd1484en & https://openknowledge.fao.org/handle/20.500.14283/cd1484en
61 Woods, J., Lynd, L., Laser, M., Batistella, M., Victoria, D., Kline K. L. (2015) Land and Bioenergy in Souza, G. M.; Victoria, R. L.; Joly, C. A.; Verdade, L. M. Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72. 259-300.
62 Youngs, H., Nogueira, L. A. H., Somerville, C. R., Goldemberg, J. (2015). Perspectives on Bioenergy in Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72, 231-256.
63 Richard, T. and El-Lakany, H. (2015). Agriculture and Forestry Integration in Souza, G. M.; Victoria, R. L.; Joly, C. A.; Verdade, L. M. Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72, 469-489.
64 Canabarro, N.I.; Silva-Ortiz, P.; Nogueira, L.A.H.; Cantarella, H.; Maciel Filho, R.; Souza, G.M. (2023). Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 171: 113019. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122009005
65 Silva, J. F. L.; Cantarella, H.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Rossetto, R.; Maciel-Filho, R.; Souza, G. M. (2024). Biofuels in Emerging Markets of Africa and Asia. IEA Bioenergy, 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Emerging-Markets-Policy-Brief-pb2_v06.pdf & https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Biofuels-in-Emerging-Markets-Factsheet-G20.pdf
66 ELOBEID, A., MOREIRA, M. M. R., ZANETTI DE LIMA, CARRIQUIRY, C. M., and HARFUCH, L. Implications of biofuel production on direct and indirect land use change: Evidence from Brazil, in Biofuels, Bioenergy and Food Security, Elsevier, 2019, pp. 125–143.
67 BOLFE et al. (2024) Bolfe, É.L.; Victoria, D.d.C.; Sano, E.E.; Bayma, G.; Massruhá, S.M.F.S.; de Oliveira, A.F. Potential for Agricultural Expansion in Degraded Pasture Lands in Brazil Based on Geospatial Databases. Land 2024, 13, 200.
68 Nogueira, G.P., Petrielli, G.P., Chagas, M.F., Henzler, D.S., Sampaio, I.L.M., Bonomi, A.M., Junqueira, T.L., Morais, E.R., & Hernandes, T. A. D. (2024). Supplying the ethanol demand for 2030 in Brazil as a land-based climate change mitigation alternative: Implications on greenhouse gases emissions. Science of The Total Environment, 951, 175782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.175782
70 Canabarro, N.I.; Silva-Ortiz, P.; Nogueira, L.A.H.; Cantarella, H.; Maciel Filho, R.; Souza, G.M. (2023). Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 171: 113019. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122009005
71 Silva, J. F. L.; Cantarella, H.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Rossetto, R.; Maciel-Filho, R.; Souza, G. M. (2024). Biofuels in Emerging Markets of Africa and Asia. IEA Bioenergy, 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Emerging-Markets-Policy-Brief-pb2_v06.pdf & https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Biofuels-in-Emerging-Markets-Factsheet-G20.pdf
72 Silva, J. F. L.; Cantarella, H.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Rossetto, R.; Maciel-Filho, R.; Souza, G. M. (2025).Meta-analysis of biofuels in emerging markets of Africa and Asia: green house gas savings and economic feasibility. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 213: 115465
73 Canabarro, N.I.; Silva-Ortiz, P.; Nogueira, L.A.H.; Cantarella, H.; Maciel Filho, R.; Souza, G.M. (2023). Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 171: 113019. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122009005
74 Silva, J. F. L.; Cantarella, H.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Rossetto, R.; Maciel-Filho, R.; Souza, G. M. (2024). Biofuels in Emerging Markets of Africa and Asia. IEA Bioenergy, 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Emerging-Markets-Policy-Brief-pb2_v06.pdf & https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Biofuels-in-Emerging-Markets-Factsheet-G20.pdf
75 Silva, J. F. L.; Cantarella, H.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Rossetto, R.; Maciel-Filho, R.; Souza, G. M. (2025).Meta-analysis of biofuels in emerging markets of Africa and Asia: green house gas savings and economic feasibility. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 213: 115465
76 Cherubin, M. R.; Carvalho, J. L. N.; Cerri, C. E. P.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Souza, G. M.; Cantarella, H. (2021). Land Use and Management Effects on Sustainable Sugarcane-Derived Bioenergy. Land, 10,72. https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Release-English-Land-Use-in-Brazil-for-Task-45.pdf & https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/1/72
77 Cherubin, M. R.; Carvalho, J. L. N.; Cerri, C. E. P.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Souza, G. M.; Cantarella, H. (2021). Land Use and Management Effects on Sustainable Sugarcane-Derived Bioenergy. Land, 10,72. https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Release-English-Land-Use-in-Brazil-for-Task-45.pdf & https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/1/72
The Food versus Fuel Non-dilemma
78 Goldemberg, J.; Souza, G. M.; Maciel -Filho, R.; Cantarella, H. (2018). Scaling up biofuels? A critical look at expectations performance and governance. Energy Policy 118, 655-657. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0301421518301940?via%3Dihub
79 Osseweijer, P., Watson, H. K., Johnson, F. X., Batistella, M., Cortez, L. A. B., Lynd, L. R., Kaffka, S. R., Long, S. P., van Meijl, H., Nassar, A. M. and Woods, J. (2015). Bioenergy and Food Security in Souza, G. M.; Victoria, R. L.; Joly, C. A.; Verdade, L. M. Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72. Page 95. https://bioenfapesp.org/scopebioenergy/images/chapters/bioenergy_sustainability_scope.pdf
80 Souza, G. M.; Victoria, R. L.; Verdade, L. M.; Joly, C. A.; Netto, P. E. A.; Cruz, C. H. B.; Cantarella, H.; Chum, H. L.; Cortez, L. A. B.; Diaz-Chavez, R.; Fernandes, E.; Fincher, G. B.; Foust, T.; Goldemberg, J.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Huntley, B. J.; Johnson, F. X.; Kaffka, S.; Karp, A.; Leal, M. R. L. V. et.al. (2015). Bioenergy & Sustainability. Policy Brief. SCOPE, v. 1, p. 6. ISSN 2412-0286. https://bioenfapesp.org/scopebioenergy/images/E-VERSION-SCOPE-Final-lowres.pdf
81 FAO, GBEP, IRENA, IEA,IRENA,UNECE, et al .Joint Statement on Sustainable bioenergy for climate and development goals (2024) . Statement developed by a Cross-Initiative coordination group on bioenergy convened by the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) https://www.fao.org/climate-change/news/news-detail/sustainable-bioenergy-for-climate-and-development-goals/en
82 FAO (2012) – Energy-Smart Food at FAO: An Overview. https://www.fao.org/4/an913e/an913e00.htm
FAO, GBEP, IRENA, IEA,IRENA,UNECE, et al .Joint Statement on Sustainable bioenergy for climate and development goals (2024) . Statement developed by a Cross-Initiative coordination group on bioenergy convened by the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) https://www.fao.org/climate-change/news/news-detail/sustainable-bioenergy-for-climate-and-development-goals/en
83 FAO (2018). Sustainability of biogas and cassava-based ethanol value chains in viet nam: results and recommendations from the implementation of the Global Bioenergy Partnership indicators.
84 Schulte, L. A., Dale, B. E., Bozzetto, S., Liebman, M., Souza, G. M., Haddad, N., … & Arbuckle, J. G. (2022). Meeting global challenges with regenerative agriculture producing food and energy. Nature Sustainability, 5(5), 384-388)
85 Schulte, L. A., Dale, B. E., Bozzetto, S., Liebman, M., Souza, G. M., Haddad, N., … & Arbuckle, J. G. (2022). Meeting global challenges with regenerative agriculture producing food and energy. Nature Sustainability, 5(5), 384-388)
86 Gurgel, A. C., Seabra, J. E., Arantes, S. M., Moreira, M. M., Lynd, L. R., & Galindo, R. (2024). Contribution of double-cropped maize ethanol in Brazil to sustainable development. Nature Sustainability, 1-12.
87 Englund, O., Mola‐Yudego, B., Börjesson, P., Cederberg, C., Dimitriou, I., Scarlat, N., & Berndes, G. (2023). Large‐scale deployment of grass in crop rotations as a multifunctional climate mitigation strategy. GCB Bioenergy, 15(2), 166-184.
88 Robertson, G. P., S. K. Hamilton, K. Paustian, and P. Smith. 2022. Land-based climate solutions for the United States. Global Change Biology 28:4912-4919. https://lter.kbs.msu.edu/pub/4040
89 Osseweijer, P., Watson, H. K., Johnson, F. X., Batistella, M., Cortez, L. A. B., Lynd, L. R., Kaffka, S. R., Long, S. P., van Meijl, H., Nassar, A. M. and Woods, J. (2015). Bioenergy and Food Security in Souza, G. M.; Victoria, R. L.; Joly, C. A.; Verdade, L. M. Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72. Page 95. https://bioenfapesp.org/scopebioenergy/images/chapters/bioenergy_sustainability_scope.pdf
90 FAO, GBEP, IRENA, IEA,IRENA,UNECE, et al .Joint Statement on Sustainable bioenergy for climate and development goals (2024) . Statement developed by a Cross-Initiative coordination group on bioenergy convened by the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) https://www.fao.org/climate-change/news/news-detail/sustainable-bioenergy-for-climate-and-development-goals/en
91 Gurgel, A. C., Seabra, J. E., Arantes, S. M., Moreira, M. M., Lynd, L. R., & Galindo, R. (2024). Contribution of double-cropped maize ethanol in Brazil to sustainable development. Nature Sustainability, 1-12.
92 Englund, O., Mola‐Yudego, B., Börjesson, P., Cederberg, C., Dimitriou, I., Scarlat, N., & Berndes, G. (2023). Large‐scale deployment of grass in crop rotations as a multifunctional climate mitigation strategy. GCB Bioenergy, 15(2), 166-184.
93 Robertson, G. P., S. K. Hamilton, K. Paustian, and P. Smith. 2022. Land-based climate solutions for the United States. Global Change Biology 28:4912-4919. https://lter.kbs.msu.edu/pub/4040
94 Ahmed, S., Warne, T., Smith, E., Goemann, H., Linse, G., Greenwood, M., Kedziora, J., Sapp, M., Kraner, D., Roemer, K., Haggerty, J. H., Jarchow, M., Swanson, D., Poulter, B. and Stoy, P. C. (2021). Systematic review on effects of bioenergy from edible versus inedible feedstocks on food security. Science of Food (2021) 5:9; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-021-00091-6
Carbon Accounting and Biofuels GHG emissions reduction potential
95 Canabarro, N.I.; Silva-Ortiz, P.; Nogueira, L.A.H.; Cantarella, H.; Maciel Filho, R.; Souza, G.M. (2023). Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 171: 113019. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122009005
96 Silva, J. F. L.; Cantarella, H.; Nogueira, L. A. H.; Rossetto, R.; Maciel-Filho, R.; Souza, G. M. (2024). Biofuels in Emerging Markets of Africa and Asia. IEA Bioenergy, 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Emerging-Markets-Policy-Brief-pb2_v06.pdf & https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/10/Biofuels-in-Emerging-Markets-Factsheet-G20.pdf
97 Moreira, M. M. R., Seabra, J. E. A., Lynd, L. R., Arantes, S. M., Cunha, M. P., Guilhoto, J. J. M. (2020). Socio-environmental and land-use impacts of double-cropped maize ethanol in Brazil. NATURE SUSTAINABILITY | VOL 3 | MARCH 2020 | 209–216. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0456-2.epdf?shared_access_token=DycLQ5Aci89fjLdVSL0IcdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0N8ShKvm5x7518YTSt_vDXsTIOyyNkcA5ckY37k_fcL835MNwVXg0MTvkyGCrBOnP8djhsQ3oTdABpn3XAiug3N5sSaLpwNFgT7Uno6jFFgLw%3D%3D
98 Souza, L. C. and Seabra, J. E. A. (2024). Technical-economic and environmental assessment of marine biofuels produced in Brazil. Cleaner Environmental Systems 13:100195. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666789424000333
99 Carvalho, F., Müller-Casseres, E., Poggo, M., Nogueira, T., Fonte, C., Wei, H. K., Portugal-Pereira, J., Rochedo, P. R. R., Szklo, A., Schaeffer, R. (2021). Prospects for carbon-neutral maritime fuels production in Brazil. Journal of Cleaner Production 326:129385. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652621035691
100 Guarenghi, M. M., Garofalo, D. E. T., Seabra, J. E. A. and Moreira, M. M. R., Novaes, R. M. L., Ramos, N. P., Nogueira, S. F. and Andrade, C. A. (2023). Land Use Change Net Removals Associated with Sugarcane in Brazil. Land 12, 584; https://doi.org/10.3390/land12030584
101 Moreira, J. R.; Romeiro, V.; Fuss, S.; Florian, K.; Pacca, S. (2016). BECCS potential in Brazil: Achieving negative emissions in ethanol and electricity production based on sugar cane bagasse and other residues. Applied Energy, Amsterdam, v. 179, p. 55-63.
102 Chagas, M.; Cavalett, O.; Klein, B.; Maciel-Filho, R.; Bonomi, A.(2016). Life cycle assessment of technologies for greenhouse gas emissions reduction in sugarcane biorefineries. Chemical Engineering Transactions, v. 50, p. 421-426.
103 Carbon accounting for sustainable biofuels. 2024. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/carbon-accounting-for-sustainable-biofuels
104 Carbon accounting for sustainable biofuels. 2024. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/carbon-accounting-for-sustainable-biofuels
105 Saddler, J., McMillan, J. and Ebadian, M. (2019). Comparison of international Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) biofuels models. IEA Bioenergy Task 39. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2019/07/IEA-B-T39_Summary_LCA-Project.pdf
106 Macedo, I. C., Nassar, A. M., Cowie, A. L., Seabra, J. E. A., Marelli, L., Otto, M., Wang, M. Q., and Tyner, W. E. (2015). Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Bioenergy in Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72, 583-616.
107 Macedo, I. C., Nassar, A. M., Cowie, A. L., Seabra, J. E. A., Marelli, L., Otto, M., Wang, M. Q., and Tyner, W. E. (2015). Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Bioenergy in Bioenergy & Sustainability: Bridging the gaps. 1. ed. Paris: SCOPE, 2015. v. 72, 583-616.
108 Carbon accounting for sustainable biofuels. 2024. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/carbon-accounting-for-sustainable-biofuels
109 Fiorini, A. C. O. et al.. Sustainable aviation fuels must control induced land use change: an integrated assessment modelling exercise for Brazil. Environmental Research Letters, Bristol, v. 18, n. 1, p. 1-11, 2023.
110 Moreira, M. M. R., Seabra, J. E. A., Lynd, L. R., Arantes, S. M., Cunha, M. P., Guilhoto, J. J. M. (2020). Socio-environmental and land-use impacts of double-cropped maize ethanol in Brazil. NATURE SUSTAINABILITY | VOL 3 | MARCH 2020 | 209–216. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0456-2.epdf?shared_access_token=DycLQ5Aci89fjLdVSL0IcdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0N8ShKvm5x7518YTSt_vDXsTIOyyNkcA5ckY37k_fcL835MNwVXg0MTvkyGCrBOnP8djhsQ3oTdABpn3XAiug3N5sSaLpwNFgT7Uno6jFFgLw%3D%3D
111 Guarenghi, M. M., Garofalo, D. F., Seabra, J. E., Moreira, M. M., Novaes, R. M., Ramos, N. P., … & de Andrade, C. A. (2023). Land use change net removals associated with sugarcane in Brazil. Land, 12(3), 584.
112 Canabarro, N.I.; Silva-Ortiz, P.; Nogueira, L.A.H.; Cantarella, H.; Maciel Filho, R.; Souza, G.M. (2023). Sustainability assessment of ethanol and biodiesel production in Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, and Guatemala. Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews. 171: 113019. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032122009005
113 Moreira, M. M. R., Seabra, J. E. A., Lynd, L. R., Arantes, S. M., Cunha, M. P., Guilhoto, J. J. M. (2020). Socio-environmental and land-use impacts of double-cropped maize ethanol in Brazil. NATURE SUSTAINABILITY | VOL 3 | MARCH 2020 | 209–216. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0456-2.epdf?shared_access_token=DycLQ5Aci89fjLdVSL0IcdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0N8ShKvm5x7518YTSt_vDXsTIOyyNkcA5ckY37k_fcL835MNwVXg0MTvkyGCrBOnP8djhsQ3oTdABpn3XAiug3N5sSaLpwNFgT7Uno6jFFgLw%3D%3D
114 Fiorini, A. C. O. et al.. Sustainable aviation fuels must control induced land use change: an integrated assessment modelling exercise for Brazil. Environmental Research Letters, Bristol, v. 18, n. 1, p. 1-11, 2023.
115 Carbon Accounting of Biofuels – Workshop Synthesis Report. (2024). https://biofutureplatform.org/news/carbon-accounting-of-biofuels/
Biofuels certification
117 Mohammadi, H. and Saddler, J. (2023). Implementation Agendas: Compare-and-Contrast Transport Biofuels Policies (2021-2023 Update). IEA Bioenergy Task 39. https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/Implementation-Agendas-Compare-and-Contrast-Transport-Biofuels-Policies.pdf
118 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
119 Redmond, A., Unnasch, S., Healy, B.D., & Camacho, F. (2024). Biomass – _Accounting Principles, Alternative Fates, and Verification. Life Cycle Associates Report LCA.8192.224.2023.
120 www.bonsucro.com
Carbon accounting policy frameworks
121 https://www.epe.gov.br/pt/publicacoes-dados-abertos/publicacoes/renovabio
122 Moreira, M. R., Arantes, S. M., Garofalo, D. F. T., Silva, J. F. L., Souza, G. M., Bachion, L. C., Harfuch, L., Palauro, G. R., Silveira, L., Maciel, V. G., Guarenghi, M. M., Cruz, G. M. (2024). Evaluation of the Brazilian RenovaBio conversion-free criteria on land use change emissions Brazilian Biofuel Program and the use of risk-management approach. IEA Bioenergy Task 45. https://www.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Report_ILUC_RenovaBio_t45_Final-version.pdf
123 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
124 https://www.iea.org/energy-system/low-emissions-fuels
126 Ahmed, S., Warne, T., Smith, E., Goemann, H., Linse, G., Greenwood, M., Kedziora, J., Sapp, M., Kraner, D., Roemer, K., Haggerty, J. H., Jarchow, M., Swanson, D., Poulter, B. and Stoy, P. C. (2021). Systematic review on effects of bioenergy from edible versus inedible feedstocks on food security. Science of Food (2021) 5:9; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41538-021-00091-6
127 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
128 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
129 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
130 Muisers, J., Jansen, A., Dijkstra, O. and Klerks, K. (2024). Improvement opportunities for policies and certification schemes promoting sustainable biofuels with low GHG emissions. Part 2: Robustness of GHG emission verification and certification of biofuels – a case study of selected supply chains and policies. IEA Bioenergy Task 39 December 2024. https://task39.ieabioenergy.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/37/2024/12/IEA-Bioenergy_T39-P3-Annex_final.pdf
Key developments in 2024 in Brazil
131 Analysis of Current Biofuels Outlook –Year 2023. TECHNICAL NOTE EPE/DPG/SDB/2024/03EPE. https://www.epe.gov.br/sites-pt/publicacoes-dados-abertos/publicacoes/PublicacoesArquivos/publicacao-834/NT-EPE-DPG-SDB-2024-03_Biofuels%20Current%20Outlook_Year2023.pdf
Comments are closed.