RAIZEN Paper Etanol Versao Completa Ingles v3 060821 2

SUSTAINABILITY
OF RAÍZEN’S ETHANOL
Ethanol production from sugarcane for
a thriving and sustainable economy
Summary of the technical report prepared by Raízen with advisory

services from Agroicone and critical revision by
PwC (PricewaterhouseCoopers Brasil Ltda).
FOREWORD
Since it was created as a result of the joint venture between Shell and Cosan
in 2011, Raízen has based its development on ethical, safe, and sustainable
practices. Raízen is one of the largest sugar and ethanol producers in Brazil.
Raízen is an integrated energy company that seeks to meet the demands of
society, today and tomorrow, operating in all phases of the production chain:
from the cultivation of sugarcane—including the production of sugar, ethanol,
and bioenergy—to logistics, distribution, and marketing of fuels.
Raízen has a diversified portfolio of renewable products aimed at contributing to

a circular, low-carbon economy. In its 23 production units operating in Brazil*,
considering that as of the date this report was published the acquisition of Biosev
was still pending final formalization by the antitrust agencies, 4.2 million tons
of sugar and approximately 2.5 billion liters of ethanol were produced and 26.9
TWh of energy were sold in the 2019-2020 crop year. The company also takes
an integrated quality approach, applying the highest quality standards to its
products and production processes. The products meet all legal requirements
and international standards for quality certification (ISOs and others) and food
safety, such as Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP), Hazard Analysis and Critical
Control Points (HACCP), and Integrated Pest Management (IPM).
We are fully aware that meeting the quality requirements established by regulatory
agencies and by our customers is critical, and we are confident that we offer the
FOREWORD
best guarantees. In addition to quality, sustainability is a value for Raízen and

since its origin guided the development of the company’s business strategies. We
know that this topic is also important to most of our customers, which is why it is
part of our value proposition in business partnerships.
Based on the premise that the quality of our products is guaranteed by different
programs and certifications adopted and recognized internationally, we are
committed to providing information about the main sustainability issues, since
they are important in our customers’ decision-making.
Sustainable production of agricultural commodities is one of the greatest

challenges for our generation, both in Brazil and worldwide. The growing demand
for food and energy, combined with limited natural resources, is an important
factor in ensuring economic and social development. This challenge requires us
to take on the role and responsibility of actively contributing to a more sustainable
development model every day, through our performance as a major player in the
sector.
This report presents a broad and transparent view of how the world, Brazil, the
sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy industry, and Raízen are dealing with important
topics such as energy transition, GHG emissions, land use, human rights,
circular economy, and transparency in order to offer a sustainable product to our
customers.
*In 2019/20 crop, Raízen had a total of 26 units, 23 in operation and 3 hibernated.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report seeks to highlight aspects related to the sustainability of ethanol as a global solution for a low-
carbon economy, with emphasis on Raízen’s sugarcane production operations. It is divided into five main topics:
(i) energy transition, (ii) greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, (iii) land use, (iv) human rights, and (v) circular
economy. The report presents sufficient and robust evidence showing that ethanol is a sustainable, readily
available, and low-emission solution that is essential to the world’s energy transition.
ENERGY TRANSITION:
The energy transition is associated with changes in the structure of the global energy mix, based on conditions
such as sustainable development, climate change, technological innovations, digitalization, efficient use of energy
resources, and low-carbon sources. The current context requires a “quick and immediate reduction” of GHG
emissions to avoid even bigger catastrophes than those already observed. Biofuels have a global infrastructure
capable of accelerating emissions reductions and the energy transition in the short term. The transition should
not be made at any cost or without proper planning. On the contrary, the best policies and technologies must be
analyzed case by case to avoid risks and amplify synergies. The adoption of biofuels supports other Sustainable
Development Goals (SDG). Many countries have already adopted requirements to blend biofuels with fossil fuels,
and production and use are expected to increase in the coming years. In this context, sugarcane ethanol stands
out as a low-cost and readily available option to combat climate change, essential in the transition to a low-carbon
economy. In the long term, diversification and complementarity between renewable sources are essential for
the energy transition. Raízen is positioned in this market as a company capable of offering renewable energy in
different forms, prioritizing a low-carbon footprint for its products and maximizing the positive impacts in several
SDGs.
GHE EMISSIONS:
EXECUTIVE SUMARY
Brazil was one of the first developing countries to ratify the Paris Agreement, committing to reduce GHG
emissions against a given baseline in the past. The country’ profile in renewable energy is differentiated, with
significant contributions from sugarcane products and hydroelectric power and, more recently, from wind and
solar energy. Sugarcane products alone accounted for 18% of the country’s energy mix in 2019 (Primary Source
of Energy). Within the context of expanding renewable energy production and reducing GHG emissions, ethanol
from sugarcane is a very attractive option due to its low-carbon footprint and is one of the best in the world among
current technologies. The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector has improved its performance through constant
technological changes and the use of agro-industrial waste. In Brazil, ethanol is an existing and widespread
solution, with lower GHG emissions per km traveled (74 to 80 gCO2e/km), which includes all emissions associated
with the production and use of the vehicle and fuel. For comparison purposes, the emissions of an electric car are
62% higher in Europe (130 gCO2e/km), and more than double in the U.S. (293 gCO2e/km) and in China (265 gCO2e/
km). According to the studies analyzed, it is possible to affirm that Raízen is one of the leaders in the production
of sugar, ethanol and bioelectricity in Brazil and also one of the international leaders in 2G technology from
sugarcane, a very low-emission option that has the possibility of increasing the yield of ethanol production by up to
50% compared to the sugar-energy standard Brazilian (which is already an international benchmark) [1], [2], [3].
LAND USE:
Brazil holds a unique position in the world in terms of land use due to its large reserve of natural vegetation and
dynamic agricultural production. This implies significant challenges in reconciling conservation and production
objectives. The combination of monitoring systems and land-saving strategies has resulted in a significant reduction
in historical deforestation rates, although there are challenges to maintaining and improving these results. In
Brazil, sugarcane accounts for less than 1% of the national territory, it is far from deforestation hotspots, such as
the Amazon, and direct deforestation is almost zero. According to the EU-Joint Research Center study, indirect
land use change (ILUC) caused by sugarcane is also unlikely. Currently, sugarcane is the commercial technology
with the highest energy yield per occupied area and it is entering a new era that focuses on using energy from
sugarcane as a whole, which makes it possible to multiply production without the need for additional areas. The
main factors that would enable the expansion of sugarcane ethanol are an increase in sugarcane productivity in
the field and increased use of agro-industrial waste: straw, bagasse, and vinasse, intended for the production of
2G ethanol, bioelectricity, and biomethane. At Raízen, the mills are located in areas where forests are increasing
and the company was one of the first to adopt private standards requiring deforestation-free supply chains, such
as Bonsucro. It also leads technological innovation sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector with its full range of land-
saving technologies for ethanol, such as 2G ethanol, biogas, pellets, and bioelectricity.
1
The figures presented throughout the report do not include the BIOSEV mills, which are under incorporation. Approval by the regulatory agencies is expected to
be formalized in the first half of 2021.
2
The Sustainable Development Goals are a global call to action to end poverty, protect the environment and the climate, and ensure that people everywhere can
enjoy peace and prosperity.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
HUMAN RIGHTS:
Brazil is one of the founding countries of the International Labor Organization (ILO) and has made a national
commitment to eliminate modern slavery practices in production chains through collaborative actions with
relevant players. In addition, the Brazilian labor legislation strongly protects and encourages workers’ safety,
health, and well-being, and imposes severe consequences for companies and individuals who fail to comply.
Labor relations have been undergoing profound changes due to mechanization, a practice already used in 97% of
the sugarcane produced in the South-Central region of the country and 99% at Raízen. Employers must comply
with strict legal requirements and take steps to encourage a process for continuous improvement in working
conditions. Raízen became a leader and is recognized worldwide in the sugarcane industry for adopting two
complementary strategies to ensure high human rights standards throughout its chain (including its suppliers):
the Bonsucro Standard and the ELO Program. In 2019, Raízen’s ELO Program was recognized during Bonsucro
Week as a transformative and innovative action. That same year, the United Nations Economic Commission for
Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) chose the program as an example of the Big Push for sustainability in
the sugarcane production chain.
CIRCULAR ECONOMY:
Throughout the sugarcane production process, there are by-products with high energy value that are converted
and reused. Bagasse, for example, is intended for generating bioelectricity and 2G ethanol, which guarantees the
energy self-sufficiency of the mills and innovation in the production of biofuel. Industrial waste, such as vinasse,
filter cake, and boiler ashes are used as fertilizers in the sugarcane fields. In modern mills, around 99.5% of all
solid waste is reused or recovered. The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector is going through a time of innovation
by creating several bioproducts to replace fossil raw materials, such as plastic. Innovation in the sector is led by
EXECUTIVE SUMARY
public and private entities in several applied researches. Regarding the use of water, sugarcane mills use closed
circuit systems. Raízen created the ReduZa program to obtain the greatest value from water reuse, reducing
water dependency and increasing energy conservation. Raízen directly contributes to responsible production,
using its basic principles to accelerate growth, increase competitiveness, and mitigate risks.
KEY FINDINGS:
The report contains facts that corroborate the relevance of the Brazilian sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector in
the global energy transition, its superior sustainability standards, and underscores the importance of ethanol to
a low-carbon economy. In addition to the proven quality of its products, the ethanol produced by Raízen greatly
contributes to the sustainable management of the soil, the mitigation of GHGs, and the well-being of thousands
of workers and farmers. Raízen is one of the largest producers of sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy in the world and
grounds its development in accordance with Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance (ESG) practices and
the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Raízen is an integrated energy company that seeks to meet the
demands of society, operating in all phases of the production chain: from the cultivation of sugarcane—including
the production of sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy—to logistics, distribution, and marketing of fuels.
CONTENTS
1. Biofuels in the transition to a low-carbon economy 07
1.1 Global GHG emissions and the need for a “quick reduction” 07
1.2 Reduction of GHG emissions in Brazil 08
1.3 The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector as a vector for a renewable 10
energy mix and reduction of GHG emissions in Brazil.
1.4 The role of ethanol in combating climate change 12
1.4.1 The low carbon footprint of sugarcane ethanol 12
1.4.2 Relationship between ethanol use and human health 13
1.4.3 Ethanol is highly competitive compared to other technologies 15

for climate change mitigation
1.4.4 The role of ethanol in the context of individual mobility transition 15
1.4.5 Biofuels already have infrastructure and policies in place 19

capable of driving emissions reductions in the short term
1.4.6 IPCC, IEA and IRENA consider biofuels to be essential in 21

combating climate change
1.4.7 Synergistic effects between sugarcane ethanol, income, 22

employment, and food security
1.5 Raízen’s high-tech, low-carbon profile 23
2. Sustainable Land Use 26
2.1 Availability of land in the world 26
2.2 Challenges for sustainable land use in Brazil 26
2.2.1 Land use and governance in Brazil 27
2.2.2 Technology for better production 29
2.2.3 Results of land use management and combination 30

of low carbon technologies
2.3 Land use performance in the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector 33
2.3.1 The relationship between sugarcane and deforestation 33

CONTENTS
2.3.2 Sugarcane and increase in natural vegetation 33
2.3.3 Sugarcane as an land-saving energy solution 33
2.3.4 Regenerative Agriculture 35
2.4 Land use and production at Raízen 37
2.4.1 Raízen as a vector for the recovery of native vegetation 37
2.4.2 Land-saving technologies at Raízen 38
3. Respect for Human Rights 39
3.1 Brazil - Human rights and working conditions: 39

companies adapting to strict rules
3.2 Sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector - Ensuring good working 40

conditions and improving practices
3.3 Working conditions at Raízen and its supply chain 42
4. Approach to circular economy 46
4.1 Brazil in the era of circular economy: legal framework and 46

business models that drive circularity
4.2 The sector and Raízen – sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector, 47
circular by nature and technology
4.2.1 Circularity in the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector 48
4.2.2 Exploring the circular process of sugarcane production 49
4.2.2.1 Use and total energy production 50
4.2.2.2 Reuse of industrial waste as fertilizers in sugarcane fields 50
4.2.2.3 Efficient use and closed circuit water system 51
4.2.2.4 Reverse logistics for agrochemical packaging 52
5. Transparency 54
6. References 55
1 BIOFUELS IN THE TRANSITION
TO A LOW-CARBON ECONOMY
Global GHG emissions need to be drastically reduced and immediate action must be taken,
especially in the energy sector. Ethanol produced from sugarcane is a consolidated
low-carbon option, with great potential for expansion and reduction of emissions.
1.1 GLOBAL GHG EMISSIONS AND THE NEED FOR A “QUICK REDUCTION”
There is consensus on the need for a quick and immediate reduction in GHG emissions to limit global warming.
Global warming is a consequence of the environmental impacts generated by modern mankind, which is causing
an increase in the average global temperature by 0.2°C every 10 years. Other impacts are already being observed
and some can be long-lasting or irreversible, such as the loss of ecosystems, damage to human health, threats to
food security, among others. According to the IPCC (2018), global CO2 emissions need to decrease by approximately
B I O F U E L S I N T H E T R A N S I T I O N TO A LOW - CA R B O N E C O N O M Y
45% by 2030 compared to 2010 levels to ensure that the earth’s temperature rise remains below 1.5°C, avoiding
environmental impacts that cause irreversible damage to humanity. In this scenario, projections are that as of
2050 global emissions should reach negative levels, mainly due to the combination of intensive use of renewable
energy and technologies for CO2 capture and storage (Figure 1) [4].
Figure 1 - Total net CO2 emissions at global level
Source: IPCC (2018). [1] Key: Figure 1 shows

the net global emissions of CO2 in different
scenarios that limit global warming to 1.5
°C, with limited or advancing emissions over
the years (pathways with higher or lower
overshoot). Pathways are identified to prevent
a climate catastrophe, which require a rapid
reduction in GHG emissions. The shaded area
shows the range of variation between the
scenarios analyzed in the IPCC report.
The transportation sector accounts for 23% of global GHG emissions, which is why it is essential to propose
low-emission transportation alternatives. The energy sector as a whole, which comprises the transportation
sector, is responsible for 73% of global GHG emissions, and also includes the generation of electricity and
heat, buildings, manufacturing and construction, fugitive emissions, and other fuel combustion. In this sector,
the generation of heat and electricity is responsible for most of the emissions, followed by transportation and
manufacturing/construction. The other global emissions come from the following sectors: agriculture (12%), land
use, land use change and forestry (6.5%), industrial processes of chemical products, cement and others (5.6%), and
waste, including landfills and wastewater (3.2%) (Figure 2) [4], [5].
Figure 2 - Share of the sectors in GHG emissions
Energia
Agropecuária
23%
50% Uso da terra, mudança no uso da terra
e silvicultura
Processos industriais, produtos
químicos, cimento e outros
Resíduos, incluindo aterros
e águas residuais
Fonte: WRI (2020) e IPCC (2018) [1], [2].
The delay in reducing emissions is risky and will require more expensive technologies, which can lead to greater
social, environmental, and economic impacts. There are several ways to achieve neutrality of global emissions
and limit global warming to 1.5°C. An accelerated energy transition—replacing fossil sources with renewable
ones—and a more rational use of resources are the two most recommended pathways, with lower social costs.
Taking immediate action reduces the need for extreme measures to prevent irreversible climate change in the
coming years. If such measures are not adopted in time, CO2 removal technologies (Carbon Dioxide Removal –
CDR) should be implemented on a large scale, representing a greater cost to society.
1.2 REDUCTION OF GHG EMISSIONS IN BRAZIL

Brazil was one of the first developing countries to ratify the Paris Agreement, committing to reduce GHG
emissions against. In December 2015, the Paris Agreement was approved and signed by 195 countries and
the European Union (EU) at the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (COP21 - UNFCCC). Brazil was one of the first developing countries to ratify the Agreement. In
2020, through the new Brazilian NDC, the country reaffirmed its commitment to reducing total net greenhouse
gas emissions by 37% by 2025 and officially commits to a 43% reduction by 2030, based on 2005 levels [6], [7].
The new Brazilian NDC expresses the indicative goal of achieving climate neutrality—i.e., zero net emissions—by
2060. This long-term goal may be revised in the future depending on the performance of the market mechanisms
of the Paris Agreement, without ruling out the possibility of adopting even more ambitious long-term strategies
[7].
The goals of the Brazilian NDC are based on actions related to land use and renewable energy, which are
fundamental for the 2020-2030 climate agenda, as they have been in recent decades. One of the goals of the
Brazilian NDC (Nationally Determined Contributions) is to achieve “zero illegal deforestation” in the Amazon. It
also provides for the restoration and reforestation of 12 million hectares of degraded land by 2030 and considers
the accelerated development of the renewable energy and low-carbon agriculture sectors to be fundamental.
Regarding the energy sector, significant efforts should be made to i) increase the share of sustainable bioenergy
in the national energy mix to about 18% by 2030; ii) achieve 10% efficiency gains in the electricity sector and 45%
renewable energy in the energy mix by 2030; iii) increase the share of renewable energy (other than hydropower)
in electricity generation from 19% in 2019 to at least 23% by 2030, including increasing the share of wind, other
biomass, and solar energy, [8]; iv) expand the use of non-hydro renewable energy in the total energy mix to between
28% and 33% by 2030 [9].
The relevance of biofuels in NDCs varies from country to country; most of which prioritize reductions in the
energy sector. Most NDCs prioritize the energy sector due to its approximately 75% share of global emissions
[10], [11]. The main pathways used to reduce GHG emissions are the sustainable use of bioenergy, measures
related to land use change and forestry, and a significant increase of renewable energy in the global energy mix
by 2050 [12]. Decarbonizing the energy sector is essential to achieving the goal of limiting global temperature rise
to 2°C.
Significant reductions in GHG emissions have already been achieved in Brazil. Annual estimates of domestic
GHG emissions are available for the period 1990-2019. They show that Brazil has reduced emissions from the land
use change and forestry sector by 40% compared to 2005 (the baseline of the Brazilian NDC), but has remained
relatively stable since 2013 [13]. Most of the reduction is directly related to a decrease in deforestation [14], [15],
(Figure 22) the establishment of protected areas, and the adoption of low-carbon technologies [16], [17]. The
high share of renewable energy in the Brazilian energy mix [18] and the technological development of agriculture
(intensification of cattle raising, direct planting, and elimination of sugar cane burning) have helped contain the
expansion of emissions in these two sectors [19], [20]. It is important to note that land use, land use change and
forests (LULUCF) still have a large share in Brazilian emissions, together with the agricultural and energy sectors
(Figure 3). In the last year, GHG emissions in Brazil increased by 9.6% compared with 2018, reaching 2.17 billion
tons of CO2e [13].
3
Increased supply of ethanol (from 34 billion liters in the 2019/2020 harvest to 50 billion liters of first generation ethanol), including through an increased share
of advanced biofuels (second generation) and an increase in biodiesel content in the diesel mix
4
The statistic should not be construed as Brazil having already reached the NDC targets, which are to be validated by the national GHG inventory in 2025.
Figure 3 - Total emissions in Brazil by sector in thousand tCO2eq (GWP-100, AR5), 1990-2019
The official data for GHG emissions in Brazil are presented up to 2019, and the estimates for recent years
confirm the trend in the emissions profile, with a greater share of the agricultural and land use change and
forestry sectors. It is worth noting that this was also a period of small increase in economic activity mainly due to
the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic that continues to this day. The relative importance of these two sectors also
depends on controlling deforestation, a factor that has a large share in total Brazilian emissions.
Brazil has a differentiated profile in terms of the use of renewable energy, with a significant share of sugarcane
products and hydroelectricity. As shown in Figure 4, renewable energy accounted for 46% of Brazil’s energy mix
(Internal Energy Supply). The global average for 2017 was only 14%, and it was even lower in OECD countries
(10.8%). Sugarcane products contribute significantly to Brazil’s renewable energy mix, which also includes water
sources (hydroelectricity), accounting for 18% and 12%, respectively, of the Brazilian energy mix. [18]. As a result,
the Brazilian energy mix is more renewable compared to other countries, and the largest contribution comes
from sugarcane, followed by hydroelectricity. Solar and wind energy have smaller shares in the Brazilian energy
mix, but are growing rapidly.5
Figure 4 - Profile of the energy mix in different territories
Brasil (2019) 46%
Mundo (2017) 14%
OCDE (2017) 11%
China (2019) 10%
0 0,25 0,5 0,75 1

RENOVÁVEIS NÃO-RENOVÁVEIS
Fonte: EPE, 2020; IEA (2020)
Brazil’s energy profile places the country at the forefront in terms of managing emissions in the energy sector.
In terms of emissions per inhabitant, each Brazilian emitted an average of 2.0 tCO2eq in 2019 (per capita energy
emissions). This number is approximately 7.5 times lower than a North American and 3 times lower than a
European or Chinese citizen, according to the latest data released by the International Energy Agency (IEA) for
the year 2017. Carbon intensity in the Brazilian economy was 0.14 kg CO2eq/US$ppp (Purchasing Power Parity
Concept)which is on average 12% less carbon intensive than the European economy, 44% less than the North
American economy, and 67% less than the Chinese economy [18].
5
The 18% contribution of sugarcane products refers to the total products derived from sugarcane (ethanol, bioelectricity, and heat) in the Brazilian energy mix,
which represents the set of energy sources available to power cars, prepare food on the stove, and generate electricity. The electricity matrix, on the other hand,
is formed by the set of sources available only for generating electricity.
1.3 THE SUGAR, ETHANOL, AND BIOENERGY SECTOR AS A VECTOR FOR A RENEWABLE
ENERGY MIX AND REDUCTION OF GHG EMISSIONS IN BRAZIL.
The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector is one of the largest contributors to the high share of renewable
energy, with great potential for reducing emissions in the future. The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector was
responsible for 18% of the Brazilian energy mix in 2019 [18]. This includes energy from hydrous and anhydrous
ethanol, bioelectricity, and biomass for heat generation and mechanical operations. These energy sources are
and will be fundamental to replace the use of fossil fuels as established in the Brazilian NDC goals and in its
implementation plans [9]. In addition to replacing the use of fossil fuels, there has been great progress in reducing
the carbon footprint throughout its value chain.
The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector is undergoing a technological transformation with more sustainable
production standards and greater efficiency in the reuse of waste. Mechanized sugarcane harvesting was
the main technological change of the last decade. The share of mechanized harvesting increased from 37% in
2008 to 89% in 2019 [21]. During the same period, improvements in the mills’ energy systems increased the
electricity surplus from 9.7 to 34.7 kWh/ton of sugarcane (258%) [22]. This had an extremely positive impact on
Brazil’s GHG emissions and working conditions and brought many opportunities to increase the use of available
biomass through new technologies, including increased electricity generation capacity, second-generation (2G)
ethanol production, and bagasse pellets for heat and electricity generation. The evolution of CO2eq emissions and
mechanized harvesting in the sugar-energy sector can be seen in Figure 5 .
TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN THE SECTOR CONTINUE TO EVOLVE

AS SUGARCANE BY-PRODUCTS (BAGASSE, STRAW, AND VINASSE)
ARE BETTER USED FOR ENERGY PURPOSES.
Figure 5 – Evolution of avoided CO2eq emissions since the signing

of the Agri-Environmental Protocol for the Sugar-Ethanol Sector (2007-2019)
Source: Protocolo Agroambiental [23], CETESB [24], Agrosatélite [25], CANASAT/INPE Project[18] (2019). UNICA [27]
The evolution of mechanized harvesting avoided the emission of more than 10 million tons of CO2eq in the state
of São Paulo, the main sugarcane producer in Brazil. In 2007, the sugarcane industry made a commitment with
the Government of the State of São Paulo to eliminate the practice of burning sugarcane straw and disseminate
good environmental practices. The following year, this commitment was signed with the São Paulo Association
of Sugarcane Producers (ORPLANA). The joint efforts resulted in the Agri-environmental Protocol for the Sugar-
Ethanol Sector. One of the most important measures implemented by the sector was to accelerate the deadline for
ending the sugarcane straw burning practice from 2021 to 2014 in areas that are suitable for mechanization, and
to 2017 instead of 2031, in the other areas (State Law 11,241/2002). Other measures included a plan for treating
agro-industrial waste and protecting springs or riparian forests through forest restoration or conservation.
Burning permits were suspended and 10.57 million tons of GHG emissions were avoided (Figure 5)
BETWEEN MARCH 2003 AND MAY 2020 (AFTER THE INTRODUCTION OF FLEX-FUEL CARS),
ETHANOL CONSUMPTION PREVENTED THE EMISSION OF MORE THAN 515 MILLION TONS OF
CO2E INTO THE ATMOSPHERE. THIS VOLUME IS EQUIVALENT TO THE COMBINED ANNUAL
EMISSIONS OF ARGENTINA, VENEZUELA, CHILE, COLOMBIA, URUGUAY, AND PARAGUAY [28].
The surplus electricity from sugarcane mills plays a fundamental role in the Brazilian electricity mix. Maintaining
these high shares of renewable electricity in the national grid has been a challenge. Hydropower, which relies on
water reservoirs and rainfall regimes, accounted for 67% of electricity production in 2018 [18]. Although natural
gas has a higher marginal cost of production and higher emissions, it offers good energy security, providing
electricity when other sources are not available. The periods of heaviest use of high-cost electricity sources are
marked with “red flags.” As seen in Figure 6, this occurs in the dry season, when the reservoir levels of the
hydroelectric plants are low.
AS ILLUSTRATED, BIOELECTRICITY FROM SUGARCANE IS GENERATED MAINLY IN THE DRY

SEASON, HELPING MAINTAIN THE LEVELS OF THE WATER RESERVOIRS IN HYDROELECTRIC
PLANTS, AVOIDING THE NEED TO DISPATCH THERMAL POWER PLANTS THAT USE FOSSIL
FUELS SUCH AS NATURAL GAS AND COAL.
Figure 6 – Production of bioelectricity, hydroelectric reservoirs, and flags
Source: UNICA (2019) [29]. Key: Production of

bioelectricity from sugarcane (columns), share of
energy stored in hydroelectric reservoirs (red line), and
national grid flags.
Significant reductions are seen in the sugarcane carbon footprint at Bonsucro certified mills. Bonsucro is a
global, multi-sector, non-profit organization that promotes the sustainable production, processing and marketing
of sugarcane. It is composed of more than 550 members from over 50 countries. According to its 2018 annual
report, Bonsucro-certified producers have reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in great part because the
mills are exporting more renewable electricity to national electricity grids, avoiding the use of fossil fuels. Overall,
Bonsucro producers avoided the emission of 1.7 MMt of CO2eq compared with 2013, allowing buyers to purchase
products with an increasingly smaller carbon footprint. Bonsucro’s most recent report (2019) estimated that
certified companies prevented 200,000 tons of CO2eq from being released into the atmosphere during their first
year of certification [30], [31].
The RenovaBio program is an important driver for improving the energy and environmental performance of
the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector. The RenovaBio Program was launched in 2017 and aims to reduce
emissions in the transportation sector, reducing the carbon footprint of fuels and increase the share of biofuels
in the transport sector. [32]. RenovaBio’s highly rigorous certification process provides incentives to record the
mills’ individual carbon footprints, contributing to better individual GHG management. Each mill has its own
carbon footprint, requiring its own industrial and agricultural information. The mills also compete with each
other in environmental performance because it has an impact on economic performance, making the sector as a
whole increasingly competitive with less GHG emissions associated with its production process. The mills cannot
separate the sugar sugarcane used to produce ethanol from the sugarcane used to produce sugar; therefore,
the pursuit of environmental improvement from ethanol benefits the production pattern of sugarcane and its by-
products as a whole.
1.4 THE ROLE OF ETHANOL IN COMBATING CLIMATE CHANGE
SUGARCANE ETHANOL IS A COMPETITIVE AND READILY AVAILABLE

LOW-CARBON SOLUTION, AND THE NEED FOR ITS EXPANSION IS RECOGNIZED
BY MAJOR INTERNATIONAL ENERGY AGENCIES. IN ADDITION TO PROMOTING
DECARBONIZATION, SUGARCANE ETHANOL BRINGS IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS
TO SEVERAL SDGS, FOOD SECURITY, HUMAN HEALTH, EMPLOYMENT, AND INCOME,
ESPECIALLY IN DEVELOPING AND LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES.
1.4.1 THE LOW CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SUGARCANE ETHANOL

Sugarcane ethanol is an advanced biofuel available on a large scale. According to the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), sugarcane ethanol meets the sustainability criteria for advanced biofuels [33], [34]. This rating
reflects the agency’s recognition of the environmental qualities of sugarcane ethanol compared to other first-
generation biofuels, which places sugarcane ethanol in a special position within the RFS (Renewable Fuel
Standard). The current European Union policy (Renewable Energy Directive - RED II) is more restrictive and
considers only 2G ethanol as an advanced biofuel [35].
There are global initiatives, such as Mission Innovation (MI) and Biofuture Platform, that aim to collaborate to
promote the transition to a more sustainable economy with a focus on advanced technologies. The purpose of
the Biofuture Platform is to help in the global fight against climate change by fostering solutions in low-carbon
transportation and bioeconomy that can help countries achieve their commitments made in the NDCs and
contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG), especially SDG 7 (Affordable and clean energy) and 13
(Climate action), and SDG 8 (Decent work and economic growth), 9 (Industry, innovation and infrastructure), 2 (Zero
Hunger and Sustainable Agriculture), and 15 (Life on land) [36]. Mission Innovation prioritizes innovation needs and
collaboration opportunities that can result in significant breakthroughs in advanced biofuel technologies. It points
out that the grand innovation challenge in sustainable biofuels offers opportunities to accelerate the adoption of
sustainable practices in agriculture, forestry, and land management, leverage mitigation and adaptation practices,
and multiply economic development opportunities by increasing the market share of advanced biofuels. [37], [38].
Brazilian first-generation (1G) sugarcane ethanol has one of the best carbon footprints in the world among
current technologies. Considering attributional approaches, the carbon footprint of sugarcane ethanol ranges
between 16 and 24 gCO2e/MJ [39], [40], which represents a reduction in GHG emissions between 73% and 82%
when compared to gasoline. The carbon footprint of sugarcane ethanol is smaller than that of US corn ethanol
(ranging from 43 to 62 gCO2e/MJ) [39] and corn ethanol (30 to 68 gCO2e/MJ), wheat (31.4 to 71.7 gCO2e/MJ) [41],
[35] and sugar beet produced in Europe (Table 1) (33 to 50 gCO2e/MJ) [35], [42]. The carbon footprint of ethanol in
“flex mills” (corn and sugarcane) in Brazil is estimated to be between 24.1 and 31.4 gCO2e/MJ [43]. For second-
crop corn mills in Brazil, the carbon footprint is estimated to be between 18.3 and 25.9 gCO2e/MJ depending on
the type of allocation [44]. In other methodologies—such as the consequential approach that considers credits
for bioelectricity generated during the ethanol production process, substituting energy from the national grid and
avoiding emissions—sugarcane ethanol can reduce emissions by more than 90% [45] and generates results with
a smaller footprint in other routes [28].7
6
Advanced or second-generation biofuels can be produced from non-food biological materials (biomass) such as forest and agricultural waste and other waste
materials, high-yielding plants or algae, and are used in transportation or industry.
7
Improvements in LCA methodologies have made it possible to advance the reliability of the results of the carbon footprint of biofuels, but the comparison
requires attention and must be done carefully. Over the past few years, large variations have been observed in the GHG and carbon footprint estimates of
biofuels [252]–[257] but improved modeling and access to new data have allowed for advances in the calculation of the Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) ) [44], [50],
[258]–[260]. Factors such as methodology, input data, model, treatment of co-products, system boundaries, approach, allocations, level of calculation detail and
specific LCA attributes can directly influence biofuel carbon footprint estimates [39].
Table 1- Carbon footprint, reduction of emissions, and volume of ethanol produced in different regions.
Key: The table above shows the carbon footprint of ethanol in different regions (Brazil, United States, and Europe) from different inputs
(sugarcane, second-crop corn, U.S. and European corn, wheat, and sugar beet) compared to gasoline. Some figures have been selected for
methodological consistency and to facilitate comparisons, presenting carbon footprints with energy and economic allocations. Data certified by
RenovaBio were not reported because the mills opted for different strategies. The pursuit of higher volumes of CBIOs can lead to the inclusion
of producers with lower quality data, which increases the carbon footprint. *The volumes of ethanol produced by the “flex mills” are distributed
between sugarcane and corn production.
The lower carbon footprint is due to the differentiators of sugarcane ethanol related to:
• Semi-perennial crop, capable of sequestering and storing carbon (detailed in section 2.4.1)
• Not related to deforestation (section 3.3.1)
• High efficiency in power generation per hectare (section 3.3.3)
• Use of waste (for own consumption and energy export), with potential for significant
increase (section 3.3.4).
Second-generation (2G) sugarcane ethanol is a low-emission option and a strong candidate to unlock a new
generation of advanced biofuels. Brazil currently has the capacity to increase the production of second generation
(2G) sugarcane ethanol, which contributes directly to meeting national GHG emission reduction targets [52]. The
technology is maturing rapidly and makes it possible to produce ethanol from agricultural and industrial waste
(straw and bagasse), especially after the practice of burning sugarcane straw in the field has been discontinued.
Straw collection has become an opportunity for biofuel production. These changes opened new perspectives for
expanding ethanol production through 2G technology [53]. In an attributional life cycle analysis approach, the
carbon footprint of 2G ethanol is estimated to be 12.9 gCO2e/MJ [46], mostly because no additional sugarcane has
to be planted (no additional area is required).
1.4.2 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ETHANOL USE AND HUMAN HEALTH
REPLACING FOSSIL FUELS WITH BIOFUELS IN URBAN CENTERS PREVENTS DEATHS AND
HOSPITALIZATIONS, GENERATING SAVINGS FOR THE PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM.
The use of ethanol improves air quality and provides gains to public health by reducing the concentration of
impurities in the air. Biofuels are alternatives originating from clean and renewable sources, with lower emissions
of pollutant gases [54], [55] and that lead to a reduction in the concentration of impurities [56] compared to
fossil fuels [57]. The lower toxicity of ethanol and biodiesel provides improvements to the air quality in large
cities, reducing public health impacts from air pollution [57], [58], [59]. This improvement in air quality is mainly
associated with lower concentration of fine inhalable particulate matter (PM2.5) [60] [61] and lower emission of
pollutants from vehicles that run on ethanol [62], [63]. Daily exposure to PM emissions can negatively affect human
health because they are directly associated with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases [64], [65]. According to
a study conducted in the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo, Brazil’s largest city, the increased use of ethanol as a
replacement for gasoline reduced the levels of ultrafine particles in the city’s atmosphere by 33%. [66], [67].
Replacing fossil fuels with biofuels prevents hundreds of deaths and hospitalizations, generating savings
for the public health system. According to a study conducted by the University of Chicago/Energy Resources
Center [67], in the United States, for every 1% in additional volume of ethanol and reduction in aromatics, US$
2.35 billion are saved. Widespread adoption of flex fuel (E83) would reduce deaths by 4,470 and save the public
sector US$40 billion (avoided monetary damages) due to reduced exposure to PM2.5 and consequently reduced
hospitalizations related to biofuel substitution. Data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) show
that the concentration of fine particles has decreased nationwide while ethanol consumption between 2000 and
2013 trended upward (Figure 7).
Figure 7 - Ratio of ethanol consumption to fine particulate matter (PM 2.5) concentration in the U.S.
PM2.5 Conc. (Left Axis) Natl. PM2.5 Standard (Left Axis) U.S. Ethanol Consump. (Right Axis)
14 14,000
13 12,000
12 10,000
Million Gals.
11 8,000
10 6,000
9 4,000
8 2,000
7 0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Source: RFA (2014) [68]
The replacement all fossil fuels with ethanol in the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo would avoid more than
12,000 hospitalizations and 875 deaths per year, resulting in savings of almost US$190 million [70].
The partial replacement of gasoline with ethanol in the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo was responsible for
a reduction of approximately 370 deaths in one year and an increase of 13 days in the life expectancy of the
population [71]. According to Castro et al. 2010, the use of biofuels in the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo has
reduced deaths and more than 8,000 annual hospitalizations because of respiratory and cardiovascular problems.
For the public health system, this is a savings of US$43 million per year. A recent study by Empresa de Pesquisa
Energética (EPE) indicates that biofuel policies have a positive impact on human health. The mandatory addition
of anhydrous ethanol to gasoline prevents hundreds of deaths per year in the Metropolitan Region of São Paulo by
reducing emissions of particulate matter. The inclusion of biofuels in the transportation matrix is becoming more
and more relevant. This becomes even more evident when we add this human health component into the analysis.
10
Particulate matter is classified by its size considering the average aerodynamic diameter of the particles. The fine or respirable particles (PM2,5) are those
below 2.5 μm and can be generated by combustion processes used in the industrial sector, from the vehicle fleet, in addition to secondary formation processes
from atmospheric reactions [261].
1.4.3 ETHANOL IS HIGHLY COMPETITIVE COMPARED TO OTHER TECHNOLOGIES
FOR CLIMATE CHANGE MITIGATION
Climate change can bring significant adaptation costs, and ethanol is an alternative solution.
One option is to reduce their negative effects by mitigating GHG emissions, which could lead to reduced damages
and lower adaptation costs. To stabilize the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere at 450ppm, mitigation costs
can reach US$180 per ton of CO2 avoided between 2020 and 2030. A study analyzes the mitigation cost of sugarcane
ethanol, assuming gasoline displacement and electricity surplus. Based on an average mitigation capacity of 2
tons CO2e/m3 and a mitigation cost of $100 per ton of CO2e, the additional value of ethanol is $0.20 per liter (the
mitigation cost could be as high as $180 tCO2 avoided, but the $100 was used conservatively). This value is one
of the externalities of the use of ethanol that is not remunerated, but that should be taken into account when
designing policies to support the production and use of ethanol [72].
First-generation (1G) biofuels already appear in several studies as a mitigation option with “negative cost.”
Negative costs indicate options that save money. In the case of ethanol, it would cost less to use ethanol than
gasoline, and it would also reduce emissions. Although the competitiveness of ethanol versus fossil fuels depends
on different factors, such as costs of feedstock (biomass), exchange rate, and oil price, biofuels are documented
by several important studies as having a negative mitigation cost (e.g. PMR-Brazil Project, Low Carbon Study)
[73], [74].
The production costs of second-generation (2G) ethanol should decrease significantly (65%) in the medium
to long term. The production costs of 2G ethanol are higher in the short term, mainly due to the high amount
allocated to additional investments and enzyme costs, which together account for approximately 65% of the total
cost of 2G ethanol. In the long term, the cost should decrease for both 1G and 2G ethanol due to improvements
in the production process and scale of production. However, projections indicate a greater downward trend in
costs for 2G ethanol if the expected technological advances are achieved. In the long term, the total cost of 1G/2G
ethanol decreases by approximately 65% (Figure 8). Waste can be cost competitive and play an important role in
supplying bioenergy in the 21st century[75].
Figure 8 - Breakdown of production costs for 1G/2G ethanol
Source: Junqueira et al. 2017 [75]
Key:
ST – Short term
MT – Medium term
LT – Long term.
1.4.4 THE ROLE OF ETHANOL IN THE CONTEXT OF INDIVIDUAL MOBILITY TRANSITION

Biofuels are key in the transition to a low-carbon economy. The use of biofuel significantly contributes to achieving the
emission reduction targets proposed in the Paris Agreement. Within the context of energy transition and sustainable
development, studies have shown that alternative and renewable sources of energy are key to limiting the increase in
global temperature by 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius by 2030, compared to pre-industrial levels [4], [76], [77]. Decarbonization
will require reducing the share of fossil fuels by low-carbon technologies such as biofuels [78], [4], [8].
Different transportation options have emerged (shared, active, electric bicycles, and electric vehicles) in
an effort to reduce GHG emissions. The transition depends on changes in the habits of the population and on
incentives to adopt urban projects that encourage people to travel on foot, use non-motorized transportation,
and ride-sharing, among others. An estimated 2,900 cities around the world have bike sharing programs [79],
and China had 250 million electric bikes in 2017. Technological advances offer cities the chance to reduce traffic
congestion in urban transportation by making better use of vehicles through ride-sharing [4].
Replacing conventional vehicles with alternative technologies presents limitations and challenges for mass
deployment. The introduction of new technologies for individual transport (flex, electric, hybrid, plug-in hybrid,
fuel cell, and hydrogen) must take into account the specificities of each country, especially regarding the energy
mix, consolidated infrastructure (expansion of the electric grid, charging time for electric vehicles in urban areas
and roads, replacement of batteries, depreciation of assets), fleet replacement, transition cost, socioeconomic
cost, and the need for new industries [80]–[82], [83]. The fuel cell appears as an option for ethanol in the future.
This technology uses energy from ethanol without requiring combustion. A major advantage would be to use
ethanol instead of the battery, which reduces issues regarding the material needed for the battery and disposal
and uses the existing infrastructure at the gas stations, with no need for charging [84].
SOLUTIONS FOR LOW-CARBON MOBILITY MUST TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE ENTIRE LIFE CYCLE
OF A TECHNOLOGY AND THE ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH IT WILL BE DEPLOYED.
Alternative combustion vehicles are not exempt from environmental impacts [85], [86]. Alternative vehicles are
being promoted and are emerging as potential replacement sources in the transportation sector due to reduced
emissions. Several factors must be considered for this transition. The comparison between conventional vehicles
(gasoline or diesel powered), electric vehicles (battery or plug-in hybrids), hybrids, and hydrogen powered
vehicles must consider aspects that directly contribute to increased GHG emissions [87]. The main aspects to be
considered are the energy source [82], vehicle production [88], and batteries [85]. Battery manufacturing is the
most critical stage from a GHG emissions standpoint [89]–[91] and can contribute 30 to 50 percent of life cycle
emissions [92], mainly due to the use of minerals. In addition, the stages that involve the production [93] and use of
the vehicle, charging time [80], and recycling directly impact GHG emissions from alternative vehicles. Therefore,
the production of electric vehicles generates higher emissions compared to conventional cars [88], [94]–[97].
Electrification will only be beneficial when we have a renewable electricity mix. Energy sources directly impact
GHG emissions from electric vehicles [87], [89], [90], [100]. Electricity generation contributes most when the
energy mix is predominantly fossil (approximately 75% of GHG emissions). As an example, in India, China, and
Russia, the emissions of electric cars can be similar or even higher than those from conventional vehicles (Figure
9), mainly due to the energy source used [80], [101]. Compared to sugarcane ethanol in Brazil, GHG emissions for
passenger cars are even lower (80 gCO2e/km)[83], [102].11
Figure 9 - GHG emissions for passenger cars (gCO2e/km)
74 80 Emission intensity (gCO2e per vehicle-km)

Source: Knobloch et al. 2020 [102].
100 200 300 400
Key: The figure above shows the ten
FRANCE countries with the highest demand
BRAZIL for cars in 2015. The vertical axis
ITALY shows the GHG emissions of
UK electric passenger vehicles (EVs)
GERMANY (gCO2e/km) and the horizontal axis
USA the shares of global demand (%).
In Brazil, for example, the share
JAPAN
of global demand is similar to
RUSSIA
that of China, but the emission of
CHINA electric vehicles, in passenger per
INDIA kilometer, is low.
Electric is less emitter than New gasoline vehicles

gasoline powered cars Uncertainty in part of the fleet are better than electric cars
HYBRID + ETHANOL IN BRAZIL ETHANOL IN BRAZIL
11
The assumptions, parameters, and approaches adopted in the LCA can generate different results and interpretations for the individual transport technology.
The comparison between technologies can generate extremely heterogeneous and diverse results. This is mainly due to the different choices regarding the
system boundary (border), level of detail in data collection (primary sources and aggregated data), assumptions and modeling [89]. Factors such as: vehicle
performance, manufacturing, and type (materials, production process, weight, steel demand); technical characteristics (travel distance, charging time and
schedule, efficiency, battery capacity), scope, time window, raw material extraction and production, final disposal, and other parameters can directly influence
the results related to GHG emissions [258], [79].
Approximately 82% of the electricity in the BRICS countries (excluding Brazil) is generated by fossil fuels.
The BRICS are major energy producers (41% of the total world production). The final consumption of these
countries is concentrated in fossil fuels (petroleum products, natural gas, and coal), accounting on average for
about 75% of their energy mix in 2019 (Figure 10). In most countries, dependence on fossil fuels is connected to
the physical and economic infrastructure and to the relationships built around this energy regime [104]. China
has been leading the implementation of new electrification technologies and investments in clean energy [83]and
has taken the lead in the renewable energy ranking because it has become the world’s largest producer, exporter,
and installer of solar panels, wind turbines, batteries, and electric vehicles. Nevertheless, non-renewable fuels
account for 73% of electricity generation. India is the fourth largest renewable energy market behind China, the
United States, and Japan, but its electricity mix is still 72% coal-based [8], [105].12
Figure 10 - BRICS: electric power generation (2019)

Source: IEA, 2020 [67]
The introduction of the electric car in countries with cleaner electricity sources may put pressure on the system
for fossil sources due to the sharp increase in demand for electricity. Brazil is a good example of renewable
electricity sources, with 83% share in 2019 [18]. However, maintaining this percentage is becoming increasingly
difficult due, among other things, to environmental restrictions. While investments have been made (primarily
in wind and solar PV generation), the introduction of plug-in electrics must consider potential negative impacts
on the electricity mix. The increased demand for energy to charge electric vehicles can lead to the use of fossil
sources such as natural gas and fuel oil, especially at night, when electricity consumption is much higher than in
other periods of the day.
12
Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.
In Brazil, ethanol is an existing and widespread solution, with lower GHG emissions per km traveled (74 to 80
gCO2e/km). Currently, among alternative fuels with low GHG emissions (in gCO2e/km), ethanol offers an immediate,
high-efficiency, low-cost solution without the need to modify transportation infrastructure. An international
publication shows emission results that are even lower than the values presented. Internal combustion engines
are already widespread all over the world and are part of today’s reality, with known technology [42]. Table 2
below shows that alternative technologies (electric, hybrid, plug-in, and hydrogen) can have higher GHG emission
results than combustion vehicles [83], [85]. There is something unique about biofuels in Brazil (a consolidated,
low GHG emission technology) and we should ask what the risks and opportunities would be having other types of
vehicles of alternative sources [83].
Table 2 - GHG emissions (in gCO2e/km) from light passenger vehicles

Hydrogen will be part of the efforts to mitigate GHG emissions in the coming decades, but challenges remain.
While the production of renewable hydrogen is technologically viable in the short to medium term, commercial
viability will be difficult to achieve without government incentives and support. Coupled with changes in the
infrastructure, there is a need for innovations and development of a sales strategy (high storage and production
costs) given the problem in distributing hydrogen (danger in the use of the substances). Currently, the low initial
use of refueling at gas stations increases the cost of hydrogen fuel and much of it has been produced from a fossil
source (natural gas) [100], [110]. In this scenario, ethanol in hybrid cars appears as an option for a faster transition
[83].
Vehicles that use lithium-ion batteries have more impact on human toxicity than combustion vehicles.
Mining and metal production activities (lithium, nickel, copper, iron, aluminum) are the main sources of toxic
substances released into the environment, which can cause potential impacts on human health. Therefore, vehicle
production may contribute more than other processes due to the emission of these toxic substances [85].
In the long term, diversification and complementarity between renewable sources are essential for the energy
transition. The introduction of alternative vehicles brings limitations and challenges for large-scale deployment.
Today, there is no single technology that performs well in all environmental impact categories. Therefore, the
need for diversification and complementarity between renewable sources is extremely important for the long-
term energy transition.
The total (power and vehicle) includes emissions from vehicle assembly and maintenance, taken from WERNET et al. (2016) [92], considering lifetimes of
13
288,394 km for internal combustion vehicles, 216,296 km for electric vehicles, and 100,000 km for batteries [259].
1.4.5 BIOFUELS ALREADY HAVE INFRASTRUCTURE AND POLICIES IN PLACE CAPABLE OF
DRIVING EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS IN THE SHORT TERM
Biofuels markets are evolving rapidly and at higher rates than conventional fossil fuels. Many countries have
adopted biofuel blending mandates (Figure 11), considering the environmental, social, and economic advantages
of introducing the biofuel into the market [111]. The positive impacts can be very relevant and bring changes
in terms of socioeconomic development, energy security, and better living conditions, especially in low-income
areas [112].
Figure 11 - Countries adopting biofuel blending mandates

Source: Trindade et al. 2019 [103].
Brazil and Latin American countries have programs in place for biofuels. These countries are Argentina, Bolivia,
Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay [112], [113]. Many years ago, developing
countries took pioneering initiatives and implemented national programs to blend ethanol with gasoline.
However, there are exceptions. In Brazil, the addition of ethanol to gasoline distributed to service stations has
been mandatory since 1931, and this practice is still maintained today [112]. One of the main policies in Brazil
is RenovaBio - the National Policy for Biofuels, created in 2016 to support the GHG reduction target in the Paris
Agreement. This is expected to lead to an even greater expansion in the production of biofuels [114], [115] (more
details in section 2.3.1).
Asia is increasing the blend of ethanol in gasoline for the next few years. In India, the sugar industry (the second
largest in the world) is one of the main drivers of rural development supporting socioeconomic growth in the
country [116], [117]. The Government of India (GOI) is implementing a new initiative to stimulate sugar mills
to divert their surplus sugar stocks to domestic ethanol production. By 2020, India will likely reach its highest
average penetration in the fuel ethanol market, reaching 5.2%, mainly due to reduced gasoline consumption.
Consumption of fuel and non-fuel ethanol has been exceeding domestic production every year. The National
Biofuels Policy remains the main directive governing the use and trade of ethanol in the country. The goal of the
national target for biofuels is to increase the ethanol blend to E10 by 2022 and E20 by 2030 [118]. In China, the race
to improve air quality is emerging as a key driver for expanding the production and use of fuel ethanol. Despite
political difficulties and lack of incentive, China reached a blending rate of 3% to 3.5% in 2020 [119]. Japan also has
a policy for blending ethanol into gasoline, but it is still low compared to other countries (approximately 2%) [120].
Brazilian ethanol holds a prominent position in several government programs that promote the sustainable
production of biofuels. In the European Union, the adoption of biofuels is guided by the Renewable Energy
Directive 2009/28/EC - EU-RED, whose objectives are to achieve 20% renewable energy in consumption, reduce
CO2 emissions by 20%, and increase energy efficiency by 20%. [121]. The year 2020 marked the beginning of
the Renewable Energy Directive (RED II), which was revised and is valid until 2030. The EU established a target
to increase the use of renewable sources in transportation from 10% in 2020 to 14% by 2030, providing greater
incentives for advanced biofuels. [122]. The new cap will be effective as of September 2021. [123]. In addition, the
European Green Deal is currently in effect. It aims to make the European Union’s economy sustainable through
measures in all sectors, including decarbonizing the energy sector, implementing cleaner forms of public and
private transportation, and investing in ecofriendly technologies. [124].
The United Kingdom will increase the permitted blend of ethanol in gasoline sold at the country’s gas stations
from 5% to 10%. Starting in September 2021, the UK government has decided to add 10% ethanol to gasoline
throughout its territory. Blending ethanol into gasoline could reduce CO2 emissions from transportation by
750,000 tons per year. The reduction in transport emissions equals 350,000 fewer cars on the roads[125], [126].
In the USA, the RFS and LCFS are the largest international biofuel programs in the world. In the United States,
there has been a movement to increase the blending of ethanol into gasoline. The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS)
aims to reduce GHG emissions, expand the renewable fuel sector, and reduce the dependence on imported oil
[34]. Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) are used to meet the objectives in this policy. RINs are a certificate
traded among market agents, which must be purchased by “obligated party” (a refiner or importer of gasoline or
diesel fuel) to meet the emissions reduction target [34]. The first public policy created within the United States,
California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS), is one of the main international policies for promoting biofuels.
[127]. The LCFS Program focuses on reducing GHG emissions by analyzing the composition of transportation fuels
and reducing carbon intensity (CI) based on the life cycle of the fuel [127]. In 2020, the United States announced
a new target for biofuels, which are expected to account for 30% of the U.S. transportation fuel market by 2050
[128], [129]. The LCFS has been updated and became more ambitious by incorporating electric vehicles; however,
biofuels remain the largest contributor to the expected reduction of emissions in the transportation sector.
Africa has the potential for sustainable expansion for ethanol production. Some countries already have a biofuels
program in place and adopt gasoline blending, including Angola, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, South Africa, Uganda,
and Zimbabwe (Table 3). Ethanol production on African soil could increase electricity generation by 40% and replace
60% of cooking fuel or 30% of liquid fossil fuel. The expansion of sugarcane into more than 1% of pastures in Angola,
Mozambique, and Zambia could replace more than 70% of the fuel used for cooking. Bioelectricity generation from
the modest expansion of sugarcane could increase by 10% in Malawi, Mozambique, and Zambia and by 20% in
Angola[130].
Table 3 - Adoption of ethanol blended with gasoline in some African countries
Fonte: Trindade et al. (2019) [103], [104]
Ethanol is emerging in Africa as an opportunity for broader access to energy, agricultural development, poverty
reduction, and national development strategies [135]. Currently, over 90% of electricity generation in South
Africa is coal-based. Currently, over 90% of electricity generation in South Africa is derived from coal. Therefore,
the use of bagasse for power generation can eliminate up to 4,800 kt CO2e per year and has the potential to reduce
550 to 6,000 kt CO2e annually due to gasoline displacement. In Zambia and Mozambique, the potential to reduce
GHG emissions can reach 70% by displacing fossil fuels [130].
1.4.6 IPCC, IEA AND IRENA CONSIDER BIOFUELS TO BE ESSENTIAL IN COMBATING
CLIMATE CHANGE
Global biofuel production is expected to reach 652 billion liters by 2050. According to IRENA (2020), to achieve
energy transformation, the global demand for biofuels must rise from 136 billion liters in 2019 to 378 billion liters
per year in 2030 and 652 billion liters per year in 2050[77], an increase of approximately 80%. In 2060, biofuels
will be used by transportation modes that are more difficult to decarbonize [4]. In the aviation sector, for example,
efforts are being made to reduce carbon emissions for international aviation. The actions aim to minimize the
adverse effect of civil aviation on the environment and include strategies to limit or reduce the impact of aviation
GHGs on the global climate, with the use of sustainable biofuels and efficiency gains as a key element. In this
scenario, replacing fossil fuels with renewable fuels is the main solution for the aviation sector in the short
and medium term [77], [137], [8]. Projections suggest a strong growth in the share of renewable sources in the
global demand for primary energy. In all scenarios, bioenergy and biofuels will grow in absolute terms by 2040.
Specifically for biofuels, global demand is expected to grow by approximately 60% by 2040 [8].
The world cannot afford to wait for electric vehicles. Several technologies are being developed and are emerging
as potential options to reduce emissions to zero in the long term [77], [138]. Electric cars and plug-in hybrids have
been gaining ground as replacements for conventional vehicles mainly in China, Europe and the United States
and are key options for the energy transition [4]. According to three IEA scenarios (2020), electric vehicles are
expected to increase their share of sales by 2030, mainly for light vehicles. Even in the highest entry scenario, they
account for about 50% of sales globally (Figure 12). For medium and heavy vehicles, 30% of sales will be electric
or fuel cell (hydrogen) [8].
Figure 12 – Annual sales scenarios for different types of vehicles
Source: IEA (2020) [8]. Key: Annual sales of electric, fuel cell and combustion vehicles for light, medium and heavy vehicles, in the three IEA
scenarios in 2030. Stated Policies Scenario - STEPS (Scenario in which COVID-19 is gradually brought under control by 2021 and the global
economy returns to pre-crisis levels. This scenario reflects all the political intentions and goals announced to date); Sustainable Development
Scenario - SDS (Scenario with increased clean energy investment policies sets the energy system on the path to achieving the sustainable energy
goals in full, including the Paris Agreement, energy access, and air quality targets. The assumptions about public health and economics are the
same as in the STEPS Scenarios); Net Zero Emissions by 2050 – NZE2050 (Scenario extends the SDS Scenario analysis. A number of countries
and companies are aiming for net zero emissions by mid-century. This target is achieved in the SDS Scenario; however, global emissions will only
reach zero by 2070. NZE2050 includes IEA’s first detailed modeling that highlights the actions needed in the coming years to achieve zero global
emissions by 2050).
1.4.7 SYNERGISTIC EFFECTS BETWEEN SUGARCANE ETHANOL, INCOME,

EMPLOYMENT, AND FOOD SECURITY
LEADING INTERNATIONAL BODIES ARGUE THAT THERE IS SYNERGY BETWEEN BIOENERGY

AND SEVERAL SDGS. SUGARCANE ETHANOL CONTRIBUTES TO GENERATING EMPLOYMENT
AND INCOME AND REDUCING FOOD INSECURITY, ESPECIALLY IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
AND LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES.
IPCC, IEA, IRENA, and FAO point out that there are great synergies between biofuels and food security.
The expansion of biofuel production, encouraged by national and international policies and agreements, raises
questions about its benefit and competition with food [138]. This perception was initially disclosed by some specific
groups, but has been reviewed by the main institutions involved in the subject. IEA, IRENA, AND FAO have shown
that, if properly done, there are great synergies between biofuels and food security [140]–[142]. Due to technological
advances in production, better management practices, efficiency gains, better management of agricultural land,
and gains in productivity, it is possible to evaluate the opportunities and measures that imply the best use of land
and resources, so that there is no discrepancy in production of raw materials used for food and biofuels [4].
Increased production of biofuels has no relation to increased food prices.

Among some variables tested as a cause of the increase in the food price index, the price of crude oil had the
highest correlation. Scientific evidence has shown that food prices are mainly driven by the price of oil (Figure 13)
[143].
Figure 13 – The relationship between fuel and food prices
Source: Shrestha et al. 2019 [143]. Key: Evolution of corn, soybean, and oil prices compared
to ethanol and biodiesel production in the United States.
Commodity prices are a poor indicator for food security—income is what matters. Price indices alone are not
food security indicators. To this point, there is little evidence showing how much price indices can tell us about food
security issues. Global commodity price movements differ from consumer food price movements [144]. A recent
study revealed that household final consumption expenditure (per-capita) explains and is more related to variation
in food security than other factors. The results reinforce that in the absence of local factors, an increase in income
drives an increase in food security. Initiatives that focus on improving national food security by concentrating on
other factors, without a clear path to increasing income, are less likely to achieve the desired effect [145].
The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector plays a key role in the Brazilian economy [146]. The sugar, ethanol,
and bioenergy chain accounts for approximately 2% of Brazil’s GDP [147] and stands out for its major contribution
to income and job generation [148]. According to CEPEA data, 3.2% of the total number of people employed in
agribusiness in 2017 was engaged in activities in the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector (production of sugarcane,
sugar, and ethanol). Sugarcane is grown in 1.2% of the national territory, concentrated mainly in the states of the
South-Central and Northeast regions. The sector is an integral part of the lives of 70,000 producers and generates
employment, income, and development in about 30% of the Brazilian municipalities [149].
Bioelectricity from sugarcane has great potential for job creation, compared to other sources in Brazil.
Production of electricity from sugarcane bagasse and straw contributed slightly to the social metrics related to
the profile of workers (average annual salary, average years of formal education, and percentage of women). In the
number of jobs per million tons, a potential of more than 12,000 jobs could be created, considering a production of
665 million tons of sugarcane. Bioelectricity from sugarcane has great potential for job creation, compared to the
electricity produced by other sources in Brazil (Figure 14). When comparing bioelectricity from sugarcane with the
production of electricity from natural gas, bioelectricity from sugarcane can double the potential for job creation,
from 0.65 to 1.47 jobs per GWh generated. Moreover, a significant portion of the jobs created in the production of
electricity from sugarcane is in the cultivation sector, an important factor in increasing employment opportunities
in rural areas [150].
Figure 14 – Comparison of employment generation for different sources

Source: SUCRE, 2020 [150]. Key: Comparison of employment generation for different sources of electricity,
renewable and fossil, by production chain category in Brazil.
1.5 RAÍZEN’S HIGH-TECH, LOW-CARBON PROFILE
RAÍZEN IS ONE OF THE WORLD’S LARGEST PRODUCERS OF SUGAR, ETHANOL, AND

BIOENERGY, A PIONER IN TECHNOLOGIES FOCUSED ON REUSING WASTE FROM ITS INDUSTRY
(2G ETHANOL, BIOGAS, PELLETS, AND BIOELECTRICITY) [2], [151].
Besides being the largest sugar and ethanol producer in Brazil, Raízen stands out as a decarbonization provider
and a leader in technology [2]. Raízen has a consistent set of strategies to develop and adopt technologies in its
business. It supports innovation centers and collaborates with startups in an ongoing process. The scalability of
second-generation (2G) ethanol facilities is capable of increasing ethanol yields by 50% based on the additional
use of sugarcane waste (cellulosic ethanol), compared to a typical Raízen mill. 2G ethanol has the potential to
significantly reduce emissions compared to the Brazilian 1G ethanol standard. This is one of the main reasons why
Raízen intends to continue investing in this technology, as a pioneer in the production of lignocellulosic ethanol
[151].
Raízen is a pioneer in the production of 2G ethanol, which has the smallest carbon footprint compared to
other biofuels, estimated at 13.6 gCO2e/MJ using current technology [40], [152]. Figure 15 shows that due to
improvements in the industrial process, such as consumption of inputs and electricity from the grid, Raízen’s 2G
ethanol carbon footprint decreased compared to the previous harvest (18/19), with a reduction of 1.53 gCO2e/
MJ. There is potential for further reduction in the carbon footprint of 2G ethanol in the coming years, considering
increased gains in process efficiency, scalability, among others. It currently has installed capacity to produce
40 million liters per year [53] from bagasse and straw. The mill can increase ethanol yields by 50% and has the
potential to significantly reduce emissions compared to Brazil’s standard first-generation (1G) ethanol.
In addition, the reuse of sugarcane waste and by-products, such as vinasse for the production of biogas, can
further reduce the carbon footprint of ethanol. Raízen is listed as one of the only companies in the world to
produce 2G ethanol [153] and the only one to produce it on a commercial scale.
Figure 15 - Raízen’s carbon footprint for 2G ethanol
All of Raízen’s mills are certified under the RenovaBio

Program, with 91% eligibility. In a study prepared by
ACV/KPMG,1G ethanol carbon footprint is estimated to
be between 19.6 and 20.95 gCO2e/MJ, for anhydrous and
hydrous ethanol, respectively [40], due to the company’s
good practices. 1G/2G integration will become the major
trend in the ethanol industry, mainly due to increased
resource efficiency in production and increased potential
for avoided emissions [154]. In the future, the increased

production of biomass and biomethane to replace the
diesel used in sugarcane cultivation will play an important
role in reducing GHG emissions, with a reduction from 24
gCO2e/MJ to 14 gCO2e/MJ for 1G ethanol. In the medium
and long term scenarios, higher agricultural productivity
Source: ACV/KPMG (2020) [40], [152].
of sugarcane, use of biomethane as a replacement for diesel and introduction of energy cane, and other expected
improvements, will further reduce GHG emissions from 1G/2G ethanol. The expected advances in 2G technology
(advancement in knowledge, process efficiency, etc.) lead to significant mitigation of the impact on climate change
and reduction to 7.5 gCO2e/MJ (Figure 16). [75].
Figure 16 - Current and future carbon footprint for 1G and 2G ethanol
Source: Junqueira et al. 2017 [75].
14
To calculate the carbon footprint of 1G ethanol, the entire agricultural upstream impact of sugarcane cultivation was allocated between ethanol and sugar, via a
subdivision of the juice based on the TRS (Total Recoverable Sugar). In other words, a separation between the amount of TRS in the juice that was used to produce sugar,
and separately for ethanol. In this case, bagasse does not receive a share of the upstream impacts because it is considered waste. The industrial impacts, which are
emissions from burning bagasse/biomass in cogeneration, were allocated to sugar, ethanol, and bagasse via energy allocation. Regarding 2G ethanol, the impact was
calculated separately from 1G ethanol and bagasse; in this case, it does not have upstream impacts from its production, since it is classified as waste. Therefore, the
carbon footprint of 2G ethanol is fully composed of the impact of production and use of industrial inputs, plus the energy consumed. 1G hydrous: 20.95 gCO2e/MJ; 1G
anhydrous: 19.6 gCO2e/MJ; 2G anhydrous: 13.6 gCO2e/MJ.
15
Energy cane is a type of sugarcane developed through genetic improvements. It has about twice the productivity of traditional sugarcane, between 50 and 100% more
fiber and between 200 and 300% more bagasse, and can adapt to more adverse climate and soil environments. Initial experiments point to very positive indicators,
but this technology is still under development and is not yet used on a large scale. Energy cane is more suitable for 2GE due to its higher concentration of fibers. Its
agricultural productivity is expected to exceed 250 tons per hectare, a volume that would generate yields of almost 25,000 liters of ethanol per hectare, a level more than
three times higher than the current productivity of first-generation ethanol (7,000 liters/hectare).
Raízen’s carbon footprint is smaller than American ethanol even considering maritime shipping.
When international shipping is included in the carbon footprint estimate, Raízen’s first- and second-generation
sugarcane ethanol remains below U.S. ethanol, both delivered to major destinations such as Japan, China, the
United States, the European Union, and Colombia (Table 4) [40], [155], [156].
Table 4 - Carbon footprint of Raízen’s 1G and 2G ethanol, compared to U.S. corn ethanol, delivered to the main
destinations (gCO2e/MJ) 16
Raízen is a major international player with a diversified portfolio of renewables. The company works to be
“cleaner internally” every day and collaborates in the energy transition of other companies and markets by
supplying products with greater decarbonization potential. In addition, it always seeks greater efficiency in
operations and greater energy use from the raw material and sugarcane by-products. Raízen is a differentiated
player in the ethanol market. The company produces advanced fuels from the reuse of waste, increasing the
decarbonization potential and reducing the carbon footprint of its products.
Biogas also emerges with a great potential to further reduce emissions through the use of existing by-products.
Raízen initiated innovative activities in its biogas plant, capable of converting filter cake and vinasse (sugarcane
by-products) into raw material for biogas production and electricity generation. This biogas is suitable for burning
in electricity generators and supplying truck fleets to replace diesel. However, there is also the option to further
purify the biogas to 95% methane, which can be a substitute for natural gas for industrial and domestic use. The
plant has a production capacity of 138 GWh per year, equivalent to the generation of electric power capable of
supplying 0.08% of Brazil’s industrial consumption and 0.1% of residential consumption [157].
Raízen contributes to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). The reduction of GHG emissions due to the
elimination of the sugarcane burning practice, improved energy efficiency and production contribute significantly
to Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) numbers 13 (Climate Action) and 7 (Affordable and clean energy). Biofuels
and electricity from bagasse and co-products are an important alternative to fossil energy, contributing to the
energy transition of companies and countries. Bioenergy also emits fewer pollutants and provides improved air
quality, which contributes to SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-Being).
16
Raízen’s carbon footprint for 1G and 2G ethanol includes land transportation to the port of Santos, departing from Piracicaba-São Paulo (0.8 gCO2e/MJ), plus
international shipping. Estimated emissions for different international destinations. Raízen’s anhydrous ethanol (19.6 gCO2e/MJ), leaving the port of Santos to
the following destinations (gCO2e/MJ): United States (California-San Francisco, 4.48 - distance 14,293 km), European Union (Amsterdam, 3.17 - distance 10,108
km), Japan (Tokyo, 6.6 - distance 21,068 km), Colombia (Barranquilla, 2.39 - distance 7,639), and China (Hong Kong, 5.96 - distance 19,027 km). Emission factor
used: “UK Government conversion factors for Company Reporting, 2018, version 1.1.” For US corn ethanol, inland shipping from Iowa to the port in Savannah.
Emission factor considered to be 80 gCO2e/t.km (average between truck and train transport, 120 and 40 gCO2e/t.km, respectively). The baseline value of the
carbon footprint for U.S. ethanol was 52.65 gCO2e/MJ (considered an average between 43.4 and 61.9 gCO2e/MJ taken from Pereira et al. (2019). Estimated
emissions for the different destinations leaving the USA (gCO2e/MJ): European Union (Amsterdam, 2.3, distance 7,343 km), Japan (Tokyo, 5.4, distance 17,225
km), Colombia (Barranquilla, 0.81, distance 2,576 km), China (Hong Kong, 6.27, distance 19,998 km), and Brazil (Santos, 2.84, distance 9,054 km).
2 SUSTAINABLE LAND USE
2.1 AVAILABILITY OF LAND IN THE WORLD
There is a major opportunity for simultaneous expansion of bioenergy and large-scale recovery of native
vegetation, generating benefits for other sustainable development goals. The area currently occupied by
bioenergy is a small fraction compared to the areas already occupied by extensive pastures, savannas, and low-
productivity grasslands (4,470 million hectares). (Figure 17). Most of these potential areas for expansion of the
sector are in developing countries, mainly Africa and Latin America (between 500 and 900 million hectares)
[112]. If implemented without planning or political coordination, bioenergy, reforestation, and other technologies
for removing carbon from the atmosphere can have unwanted side effects. However, by combining appropriate
technologies and policies that guide orderly growth, we can expect not only beneficial impacts for mitigation, but
also several positive effects on other Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) [4].
Figure 17 - Land availability in the world
1% (1-1%)
Infrastructure 1%
12% (12-14%)
Irrigated copland 2%
Non-irrigated cropland 10%
37%(30-47%)
S U S TA I N A B L E L A N D U S E
Global ice-free Intensive pasture 2%

surface 100% Used savannahs and shrublands 16%
Extensive pasture 19%
(130Mkm²)
22%(16-23%)
Plantation forests 2%
Forests managed for timber and other uses 20%
28%(24-31%)
Unforested ecosystems with minimal human use 7%
Forests (intact or primary) with minimal human use 9%
Other land (barren, rock) 12%
Source: IPCC (2018) [4].
Bioenergy production can potentially be expanded on 83 million hectares of abandoned land around the world.
Recently abandoned land holds promise in the short term for increasing the availability of land for bioenergy
production while minimizing risks to food security (no competition for land intended for food production) and
other environmental factors (such as expansion over native vegetation). There are at least 83 million hectares
of abandoned agricultural land whose use could generate between 6 and 39 EJ per year (11 to 68% of current
demand for bioenergy) [158].
2.2 CHALLENGES FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND USE IN BRAZIL

The simplistic analysis of land use in the Brazilian territory results in polarized and erroneous conclusions.
Understanding the causes that lead to human-induced soil change is key to improving efficiency in the use of resources,
reducing deforestation, restructuring spatial planning procedures, or even adopting land-saving strategies. Brazil
holds a privileged position in the world in terms of land use due to its large reserve of natural vegetation while having
a dynamic agricultural production. It is an extremely diverse country, containing between 15% and 20% of the planet’s
biological diversity [159]. The country is the size of a continent, about twice the size of the European Union (EU) and
almost 35 times the size of the United Kingdom [160], [161]. It is also a major player in food production systems
thanks to technological development (a world leader in productivity growth averaging 3% per year since the 1970s)
and the expansion of agricultural areas [162]. Land use is a dynamic and complex phenomenon determined by the
synergy between market forces, socioeconomic needs, public policies and private practices, and the biophysical
constraints presented by ecosystems [162]. Due to its large size and regional inequalities, the country is not uniform
in terms of commodity supply chains. The use and distribution of land cover in Brazil can be seen in Figure 18.
BRAZIL HOLDS A UNIQUE POSITION IN THE WORLD IN TERMS
OF LAND USE DUE TO ITS LARGE RESERVE OF NATURAL VEGETATION
AND DYNAMIC AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION
Figure 18 - The use and distribution of land cover in Brazil (2018)
Source: MAPBIOMAS Coleção 4.1 (2020) [164].
Although it is a large agricultural producer, most of the Brazilian territory is covered by natural vegetation.
In 2018, nearly 67% (589 Mha) of the country was forest or other natural formations and only 1% was used
for sugarcane. The second largest portion of land, 21% (or 183 Mha), is pasture, and a third portion of 7% (60
Mha) is intended for crops. At the same time, the country is the world’s largest exporter of various agricultural
commodities, such as soy, sugar, corn, coffee, beef, chicken, cotton, among others. The sugarcane area accounts
for nearly 1% of Brazilian land [165] and was used to produce almost 46% of the total ethanol consumed by light
vehicles in Brazil [166]. In 2019/2020 Brazil produced approximately 30 million tons of sugar and 34 billion liters of
sugarcane ethanol. In addition, the country supplied 46% of the fuel for the domestic light vehicle fleet and 36% of
the world’s sugar exports.[167] In 2019, a total of 27.3 TWh of bioelectricity was exported to the grid and 26.3 TWh
by November 2020 [47], [168]. During the same period, Raízen produced 4.2 million tons of sugar and 2.5 billion
liters of ethanol, equivalent to 11% and 15.6% of production in the South-Central region.
MANAGING LAND ALLOCATION IS A MAJOR CHALLENGE THAT BRAZIL HAS BEEN FACING
THROUGH COMMAND AND CONTROL MEASURES (MAINLY AIMED AT THE CONSERVATION OF
LAND WITH NATURAL FORESTS), INVESTMENTS IN R&D IN THE AGRICULTURAL SECTOR, AND
PROMOTION OF LEGALLY NON-CULTIVATED AREAS, SUCH AS PERMANENT PRESERVATION
AREAS (APP - ÁREAS DE PROTEÇÃO PERMANENTE) AND LEGAL RESERVE (RL - RESERVA
LEGAL) - CONCEPTS AND CRITERIA THAT DON’T EXIST IN MOST COUNTRIES.
2.2.1 LAND USE AND GOVERNANCE IN BRAZIL

Brazil has one of the most comprehensive regulatory frameworks to protect natural vegetation [169].
In the case of private land, two types of instruments protect the natural vegetation: Legal Reserves (RL) and
Permanent Preservation Areas (APP) (Figure 19). RL refers to the area on each property that must be set aside
for environmental purposes. The RL varies from 50% to 80% on farms in the Amazon biome. In the cerrado of the
Legal Amazon, this area is 35%. In all properties in Brazil, the minimum area is 20%. APP refers to portions of
land within private farms that are close to rivers, springs, water bodies, or on steep slopes and hilltops that must
be permanently covered by natural vegetation. For riparian zones, the buffer zones vary from 5 to 500m [170]. On
public lands, vegetation is protected as Indigenous Reserves [171], Conservation Units [172], and Military Lands.
The regulation is complemented by others, of a regional nature, such as the Atlantic Forest Law (Lei da Mata
Atlântica) that specifically protects this type of tropical forest that covers a large part of the Brazilian coast and
the southeast region of the country [173]. Figure 20 shows the distribution of the current native vegetation cover.
Figure 19 – Brazilian Biomes, Figure 20 - Distribution of the existing native
Legal Amazon and size required vegetation cover by land tenure category in the
for Legal Reserve Brazilian territory
Source: Agroicone (2020), based on the official cartography of IBGE Source: Agroicone (2020), based on Freitas et al (2018) [16].
(Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics) [174].
The vast majority of national vegetation is legally protected and cannot be converted to other uses.
A recent study on the legal status of the existing natural vegetation shows that approximately 31% of the country’s
total native vegetation is protected by law within private lands, mostly as RL and APP [16]. Another 37% of the
existing natural vegetation areas are currently protected on public lands in the form of indigenous territories,
different types of conservation units (UC - Unidades De Conservação) and a smaller volume of military lands.
Another 18% of the total vegetation is on private land with no legal obligation for protection. A final portion of 15%
has not yet been assigned (Figure 19).
Complying with laws and other commitments is just as important as establishing regulations. The National Policy
on Climate Change (PNMC), and the implementation of the Action Plan for Prevention and Control of Deforestation
in the Legal Amazon and Cerrado (PPCDAm and PPCerrado, respectively) have played an important role in reducing
illegal logging. The revolution in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) (particularly represented by
deforestation alerts based on new remote sensing technologies) has made it possible to capture detailed data to
monitor and enforce these policies. Together with private commitments, these interventions were instrumental in
significantly reducing deforestation rates in the mid-2000s.
The new Brazilian Forest Code provides tools for transparency between the various players in the supply chain.
The Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) is one of the most important aspects of the new Code. The CAR is an
electronic national public registry (based on a geographic information system) that is mandatory for all rural
properties in order to integrate environmental information. It is composed of a database for environmental and
economic control, monitoring, and planning, and can also combat deforestation. The CAR is a requirement for
exercising several rights, such as obtaining permission to suppress native vegetation and performing activities in
consolidated areas. Furthermore, all financial institutions will only grant agricultural credit to rural properties that
are registered in the CAR [175]–[177]. According to information from the Rural Environmental Registration System
(SICAR), the number of registrations in the CAR by January 2020 exceeded 6.4 million rural properties throughout
the country, distributed in a registered area of over 540 Mha, exceeding the area subject to registration estimated
by the Agricultural Census of the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics for agricultural establishments. In
2019 alone, approximately 42 million hectares were registered. Currently, most of the rural properties in the country
are registered in the CAR, which leads the focus of the actions to the analysis and environmental compliance of the
registers [178].
17
The Prodes project (created in 1988) became part of the Action Plan of an Interministerial Working Group to Prevent and Control Deforestation in the Amazon
in 2005 and later included other biomes. Prodes employs different types of satellite imagery that are combined to achieve high quality spatial resolution,
minimize cloud interference, and ensure interoperability criteria. The spatial data provided by Prodes is considered reliable by the global scientific community
and has been used as an index to subsidize and validate public policies in Brazil (INPE - National Institute of Space Research (INPE)).
2.2.2 TECHNOLOGY FOR BETTER PRODUCTION
Significant technological improvements have been observed in the Brazilian agricultural sector as a result
of the development and deployment of land-saving technologies. In recent decades, Brazil has advanced in
techniques that optimize land use. This has significantly increased agricultural production with reduced land use
and increased productivity in the country [162]. Some of the agricultural practices that have stood out as “land-
saving strategies” in Brazil include livestock intensification, Integrated Crop-Livestock Systems (ICLS), and crop
rotation [20].
Livestock intensification has played an important role in the availability of significant amounts of land,
thereby reducing agricultural pressure on forests [179]. Several studies show that Brazilian pastures have high
potential for intensification [180] and have played a key role in reducing deforestation [181]. The increase in
productivity was possible because of the improvement in the cattle’s diet, the reduction in the slaughter time of
beef cattle, and the implementation of more intensive production systems (such as better pasture management,
feedlot systems, and integration systems). The scenario for Brazilian livestock was positive in the last decade
(2008-2018), with a 4.7% increase in the cattle herd, while the pasture area decreased by about 1%. [182]. Over
a longer period and considering a more complete set of efficiency indicators (such as slaughter time and animal
weight), livestock production increased 169% between 1990 and 2019, while the area decreased 15% according
to industry estimates[183]. Although the exact area is still uncertain due to different variations, the opportunities
for expansion into degraded and low-productivity pasture areas are huge. When considering degraded pastures
alone, the country has approximately 30 Mha [177] that can be used for agricultural and livestock activities. For
comparison purposes, this area of pasture is three times the total area of sugarcane in Brazil. By 2050, the
continued advancement of technology could increase this area to 68 million hectares.
Multi-cropping and integrated farming systems are land-saving strategies to dissociate agricultural production
from deforestation in Brazil. Multi-cropping is the practice of growing two or more crops simultaneously
(sequential cropping and integration of productive crops) on the same field during a single planting season in
order to make the most of the land. The main crops that use sequential cropping in Brazil are corn, peanuts,
potatoes, and beans [177]. Sugarcane is normally integrated with soybeans or peanuts in the reform areas.
The main purpose of integrated agricultural systems is to intensify land use by producing several activities -
agriculture, livestock, and forestry - in a sustainable way. Agricultural production can be integrated in different
ways, with the most common involving livestock activity [17], which can be integrated with sugarcane in several
ways. The advantages of integrated livestock production include the possibility of faster economic returns, land
optimization, and increased carbon stocks. In addition to the availability of land, livestock farming contributes to
agriculture and forestry by cycling nutrients, increasing organic matter, storing water, and improving the quality
of the soil cover for direct planting [182]. In 2018, the area occupied by ICLFS (Integrated Crop-Livestock-Forestry
Systems) (Figure 21) [17]in Brazil reached 15 Mha, concentrated in the South-Central region of Brazil.
Figure 21 - Evolution of the integrated production systems in Brazil
Source: Rede iLPF (2020)

[17]. Research commissioned
by the ICLFI Development
Network and conducted by the
Kleffmann Group during the
2015/2016 harvest estimated
that 11,468,124 hectares (ha)
of land in Brazil are used
for integrated agricultural
production systems.
If other definitions of pasture (such as unused land) are included, the total area of degraded pasture is estimated to be 90 Mha [180]. Part of this area is
18
suitable for agricultural production.

2.2.3 RESULTS OF LAND USE MANAGEMENT AND COMBINATION
OF LOW CARBON TECHNOLOGIES
The combination of monitoring systems and land-saving strategies have resulted in a significant reduction in
deforestation rates, although challenges remain to improve these results.
The evolution of deforestation rates in the Amazon and Cerrado can be seen in Figure 22. The historical rate of
deforestation decreased dramatically after reaching its peak in 2004 to its lowest level in 2012. The government
implemented a set of strategies, such as the creation of new protected areas (with different levels of restriction),
improved interactions between government agencies, and satellite surveillance to monitor and identify specific
deforestation hotspots, with effective results [181], [185]. Since 2012, the total deforestation rates in these two
biomes seem to have reached their lowest point, with annual rates hovering around 1.6 Mha per year. Current
deforestation rates are 60% and 75% lower in 2020 than in 2004 in the Amazon and Cerrado, respectively. It
should be noted that for the last year of available data, there has been an increase in the rate of deforestation
in the Amazon, while levels of deforestation in the Cerrado have remained the same as in recent years. It is also
important to point out that agricultural production has been increasing significantly in all relevant sectors (meat,
grains, and sugarcane products) due to the intense adoption of land-saving strategies.
Figure 22 - Deforestation in the Amazon and Cerrado Biomes (in million hectares)
The combination of private and public

management with technological development
makes it possible to obtain sustainable and high
quality agricultural products in Brazil.
As shown, Brazil has developed a set of tools

that has reduced and dissociated agricultural
production from deforestation. Although
deforestation still exists, it is not directly related
to agricultural production as a whole. Any such
conjecture must consider the characteristics of
each specific supply chain, including expansion
patterns, production regions, the existence of
official and sector land use commitments, and
the availability of enforcement mechanisms.
2.3 LAND USE PERFORMANCE IN THE SUGAR, ETHANOL, AND BIOENERGY SECTOR
2.3.1 THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SUGARCANE AND DEFORESTATION
SUGARCANE POSES NO DIRECT OR INDIRECT DEFORESTATION RISK IN BRAZIL;

ON THE CONTRARY, IT IS CORRELATED WITH THE RECOVERY
OF NATIVE VEGETATION.
Sugarcane is mainly produced in the South-Central and Northeast regions, which are geographically distant
from deforestation areas. As mentioned, Brazil is the size of a continent and has different land uses and production
patterns. Figure 23 shows the location of sugarcane mills in the Brazilian biomes. Brazil has two main sugarcane
production areas: (i) the South-Central region, which is covered by the Cerrado and Atlantic Forest biomes, and
accounts for more than 90% of Brazilian production, and (ii) the Northeast coast, whose main regional biome is
the Atlantic Forest and the transition zone to the Caatinga, responsible for approximately 8% of the domestic
production. Due to logistics and transportation costs, the sugarcane fields that supply the mills are located at an
average distance of approximately 20 to 30 km from the industrial units.
19
These are the most relevant biomes and the regions with the most intense land use in Brazil
Figure 23 - Location of ethanol mills in Brazil
As shown in the satellite imagery, sugarcane has

not expanded over natural areas in recent decades
[186]. Recent GIS data identify sugarcane expansion
patterns in different periods [164]. Figure 24 shows the
sugarcane expansion pattern between 2008 and 2017.
These data show that 57% of the sugarcane area that
existed in 2017 was already planted with sugarcane
in 2008, and the remaining 43% was expansion of the
sugarcane area into other areas, such as pastures
and other crops [187]. This expansion was mainly to
pasture (56%), agriculture and pasture (16%), and
annual and perennial crops (25%), with only 1% to
natural forest areas and the rest transitioned to other
areas (non-forest).
Figure 24 - Sugarcane expansion from 2008 to 2017 The European Joint Research Center (JRC)
considered sugarcane ethanol to be low risk for
Indirect Land Use Change (iLUC). In 2019, the JRC

estimated and disclosed future iLUC projections for
sugarcane cultivation in Brazil. The study concluded
that the sugarcane expansion projected for 2030 into
native vegetation areas in forests and cerrado would
be negligible (less than 2%). The conversion of land
used for food crops to sugarcane production is also
negligible (less than 1%), since 97% of the expansion
is expected to occur on pastureland. These and other
interesting findings can be seen in Figure 25, taken
directly from the JRC study [187].
Figure 25 - iLUC results on potential impacts of

sugarcane expansion in Brazil
Source: Joint Research Centre/UE (2019)
Eligibility criteria for the RenovaBio program improved deforestation restrictions, which were previously
determined by the Sugarcane Zoning (ZAE - Zoneamento da Cana-de-açúcar). Eligibility criteria for RenovaBio
include restrictions to all types of removal of natural vegetation in all Brazilian biomes and compliance with the
Forest Code, showing that the Rural Environmental Registry (CAR) is in order. The program has stronger inspection
tools, ensuring the traceability of biomass. All sugarcane growers are required to demonstrate this compliance by
combining information from satellite imagery with geo-referenced farm location data. This information is verified
by a third party (inspection firms recognized by the ANP) and then by the National Agency of Petroleum, Natural
Gas, and Biofuels (ANP).
RenovaBio – Federal Law No. 13,576/2017
The RenovaBio Program was launched in 2017 and came into force in 2020. It aims to reduce emissions in the
transportation sector and “recognizes the role of biofuels as instruments to decarbonize the Brazilian transportation
matrix, in line with the GHG emission compensation targets assumed by Brazil under the Paris Agreement.”
Based on market mechanisms, the government establishes reduction targets for fuel distributors, and biofuel
production facilities issue Emission Reduction Certificates (CBIOs) - “a certificate whose value corresponds to the
carbon intensity of the biofuel produced during its life cycle. CBIOs are issued by biofuel producers and purchased
by fuel distributors on the stock exchange” [188]. This is a mechanism for trading carbon credits that rewards
biofuel producers.
The economic benefit of the mills is obtained based on a certification program that allows for individual recognition
of their environmental performance. The certification program has two pillars: eligibility criteria and emission
reduction compared to fossil fuel. The certification process offers incentives for recording the carbon footprint
of each mill, contributing to better management of GHG at the industrial and agricultural level. Therefore, the
search for environmental improvements through ethanol has a direct impact on the overall production patterns
of sugarcane.
Eligibility criteria require provision of deforestation-free biomass and compliance with environmental regulations
(which in Brazil includes compliance with the Forest Code). GHG emissions reductions are calculated in RenovaCalc,
a life cycle assessment tool (cradle to grave), with an attributional approach, in which industrial, agricultural, and
logistical details of each producer must be entered. The certification process is evaluated by accredited inspection
firms and undergoes a public consultation process before being analyzed for the last time by the National Agency
of Petroleum, Natural Gas, and Biofuels (ANP).
RenovaBio’s first year in effect coincided with the unpredictable pandemic scenario, which impacted the fuel
market and the commercialization of CBIOs. This demanded quick action from the Ministry of Mines and Energy
(MME) and resulted in the adjustment of the mandatory targets in order to accommodate the new scenario ( a
50% reduction, to 14.9 million CBIOs) [189]. Despite the great uncertainty in the market, the generation of CBIOs
at the end of 2020 exceeded the mandatory target (Figure 26), which demonstrates that the sizing considered for
the revision of the target was accurate.
The commercialization gained greater traction after the revised targets were announced, when the market
achieved greater liquidity and CBIO reached its price peak (R$72) [190]. Despite this scenario, RenovaBio’s
first year in effect ended with 97.6% of the target met and 18.7 million CBIOs issued, proving the reliability and
commitment of the parties involved in the program’s operation [187]. In this context, Raízen has the greatest
capacity for generating CBIOs in RenovaBio
Figure 26 - Monthly evolution of the number of CBIOs issued in 2020
Source: ANP (2020) [189]
20
CBIOs are generated from the sale of biofuels in the domestic market and in proportion to the energy efficiency score—the amount of greenhouse gas
emissions “saved” by the renewable compared to the current fossil fuel—of that product.
21
MapBiomas is an initiative of the Climate Observatory’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Estimating System (SEEG) and is produced by a collaborative network of
co-creators formed by NGOs, universities, and technology companies organized by biomes and cross-cutting topics.
2.3.2 SUGARCANE AND INCREASE IN NATURAL VEGETATION
Besides not being related to deforestation, 78% of the areas planted with sugarcane are located in municipalities
where forest areas have increased. Since deforestation data only account for reductions in forest areas, it is
important to consider the change in these areas, which can be negative or positive. We calculated the net change
in forest areas between 2008 and 2018 by municipality by using data from MapBiomas and looked at the extent of
the sugarcane area in each municipality each year. These calculations revealed that 70% of Brazilian sugarcane
areas are located in municipalities where there in native forests have increased (the area in 2018 is larger than in
2008). This proportion rises to 78% when planted forests are also accounted for (not just native forests).
2.3.3 SUGARCANE AS AN LAND-SAVING ENERGY SOLUTION
SUGARCANE IS THE COMMERCIAL TECHNOLOGY WITH THE HIGHEST ENERGY YIELD

PER PLANTED AREA AND IS ENTERING A NEW ERA BY FOCUSING ON THE ENERGY USE OF
AGRO-INDUSTRIAL WASTE, WHICH MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO MULTIPLY PRODUCTION WITHOUT
THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL AREAS.
Under the current conditions in Brazil, the energy output of sugarcane is between 510 and 600 GJ/ha/year,
and this can increase. Sugarcane culms are essentially composed of sucrose (14-16%) and bagasse (12-14%), a
fibrous lignocellulosic material. In energy terms, while the sugar content represents 2.54 GJ/ton of sugarcane,
bagasse (used in all mills), together with the waste from the harvest (sugarcane leaves and tops) represents 4.65
GJ/ton of sugarcane, almost twice as much energy as the sucrose used as raw material for ethanol production. For
an average sugarcane yield of 82.4 t/ha, the amount of energy per hectare is 383 GJ. Considering a cogeneration
efficiency of 69%, 287 GJ/ha are provided from sugarcane by-products. Compared to other agricultural inputs,
sugarcane has one of the best energy outputs (Table 5) [191]–[193], [194].
Table 5 – Comparison of the different inputs for ethanol (GJ/ha)
Source: adapted from SOUZA et al. 2015 [146], . Key: overview of the amounts of biofuel and bioenergy that could be produced per hectare, based on the current yields
for each crop in specific regions. The biofuel value for sugarcane was calculated based on the yield of 82.4 t/ha and sugar content of 2.54 GJ/ha. *This refers to 1G
ethanol, but total biomass can be converted to liquid via 2G.
Compared to other raw materials used to produce ethanol, sugarcane has a higher yield, approximately 7,000
liters per hectare. There are considerable differences in ethanol productivity when considering the type of raw
material used and where production takes place. Comparatively, Brazil is by far the country with the highest
levels of productivity. The country produces on average 6,900 liters per hectare (l/ha) of sugarcane ethanol, while
the European Union produces 5,400 l/ha of ethanol from sugar beets and only 2,450 l/ha of ethanol from wheat.
Brazilian sugarcane ethanol is also significantly higher than the productivity of sugarcane ethanol produced in
India (5,200 liters/ha), corn ethanol produced in the United States (4,010 l/ha), and ethanol from cassava produced
in Thailand (3,100 l/ha) [111], [195]. If the 2G ethanol produced by Raízen is included in the productivity of 1G
sugarcane ethanol, productivity can reach 8,148 liters per hectare (Figure 27).
21
MapBiomas is an initiative of the Climate Observatory’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Estimating System (SEEG) and is produced by a collaborative
network of co-creators formed by NGOs, universities, and technology companies organized by biomes and cross-cutting topics.
Figure 2722 – Ethanol production with commercially available technologies (1,000 liters/ha)
Wheat - EU
Sorghum - India
Cassava - Thailand
Corn - USA
Sugarcane - India
Sugar Beet - EU
Sugarcane - Brazil
Sugarcane - Raízen
Source: Bordonal et al. (2018); Neves et al. (2020) [111], [195].
THERE IS GREAT POTENTIAL FOR INCREASING ENERGY PRODUCTION FROM SUGARCANE

WITHOUT THE NEED TO EXPAND CULTIVATION AREAS. THE MAIN FACTORS THAT MAKE THIS
EXPANSION POSSIBLE ARE THE INCREASE IN SUGARCANE PRODUCTIVITY IN THE FIELD,
THE REUSE OF AGRO-INDUSTRIAL WASTE (STRAW, BAGASSE, AND VINASSE),
THE USE OF ENERGY CANE, AND THE PRODUCTION OF BIOMETHANE.
Average sugarcane productivity is 80 t/ha, with the potential to reach 140 to 180 tons per hectare in the
South-Central region. The productivity of Brazilian sugarcane is below its physiological potential and can vary
considerably from one location or region to another. A study points out that, considering the main causes of
sugarcane yield gaps in Brazil, the use of drought-tolerant cultivars and deep soil preparation have emerged as
the best strategies to reduce risks and increase yield gains in certain regions of the country [196]. It is estimated
that by 2030, the cultivation of energy cane, coupled with process improvements, could increase the annual energy
productivity from sugarcane by 140%, from 628 GJ/ha to 1,228 GJ/ha. The development of sugarcane varieties with
higher energy yields, based on more fiber, is synergistic with the development of processes capable of increasing
lignocellulosic raw materials [146].
Mechanization has provided a significant amount of sugarcane straw for energy generation. With advances in
mechanized harvesting, a large amount of straw has been left in the field, which implies changes throughout
the agricultural environment. This straw is beneficial for both soil and plant protection (against erosion, organic
carbon stock in the soil, nutrient recycling, among other). Straw accounts for about 1/3 of all sugarcane energy,
and, in simplified terms, its physical and chemical characteristics are similar to those of bagasse. In this way, it
can be used as additional fuel to supply cogeneration systems or as feedstock for the production of 2G ethanol
[197]. Studies show that the amount of straw in the field that is considered ideal depends on local conditions,
farming practices, straw characteristics, and others. In simplified terms, up to 50% of the straw in the field could
be removed, enough to improve sugarcane growth and productivity, while the remaining 50% could be removed for
the production of 2G ethanol or bioelectricity, without harming the crop [198]–[203].
22
The following assumptions were used to calculate the productivity potential for Raízen’s sugarcane ethanol, including 2G ethanol: availability of additional
bagasse for 2GE, with investments in energy efficiency at the mills, and potential 20% surplus of the bagasse generated (approximately 30% of the sugarcane).
Therefore, 4.8 tons of bagasse per hectare (80 tons of sugarcane per hectare - TCH) are available. In addition, straw is available for 2GE: 12% of sugarcane is
straw and 50% of this straw could be collected. Thus, 4.8 tons of straw per hectare are available for 2GE (TCH 80). Thus, considering the same conversion of 130
liters per ton of biomass (wet basis), these 9.6 tons of biomass (4.8 of bagasse and 4.8 of straw) could generate 1,248 liters of 2GE per hectare.
The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector has great potential for generating surplus electricity. From a
technological standpoint, it is important to recognize the transformation in the profile of the sugar, ethanol, and
bioenergy sector, with the inclusion of bioelectricity sales in the group of products sold by the mills. Today, the
sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector produces bioelectricity mainly from bagasse, although sugarcane straw
also has great potential for producing surplus electricity [52], [150]. In 2019/2020, approximately 642 million tons
of sugarcane were harvested in Brazil, and by November 2020, 26.3 TWh of bioelectricity were exported to the
national electricity system [47], [168]. According to RenovaBio’s expectations, the generation of surplus electricity
from sugarcane in Brazil could increase from the current 22 TWh to 141 TWh by recovering 50% of the straw
currently produced and improving the cogeneration system (bagasse + 50% straw), without the need for additional
land and replacing electricity generated from natural gas [150].
2G ethanol is a viable option for expanding production without additional demand for land. 2G ethanol is
emerging as an option to significantly increase the availability of ethanol in the market without creating demand
for land. 2G ethanol increases ethanol production capacity per ton of sugarcane harvested, reduces the need for
feedstock and, consequently, the need for agricultural land for biofuel production. Projected efficiencies for 2G
ethanol production range from 181 to 350 liters per ton of lignocellulosic material (dry basis), equivalent to values
between 19 and 37 liters of 2G ethanol per ton of sugarcane [52]. The main advantages of 2G ethanol are: (i) the
possibility of improving ethanol production between 50% and 60% without increasing the area planted (compared
to a typical Brazilian mill); (ii) the large amount of biomass available ( approximately 270 to 280 kg of bagasse and
140 kg of straw per ton of sugarcane); and (iii) availability of bagasse in the industrial unit [204].
Investments in energy efficiency and the use of bagasse and straw in the South-Central region of Brazil can
increase the production of 2G ethanol by 13.4 billion liters. The following assumptions were considered for this
value: (i) 20% surplus bagasse in mills that invest in energy efficiency; (ii) generation of 12% of straw per ton of
sugarcane, and up to 30% of this 12% can be collected from the field; (iii) productivity of 80 tons of sugarcane per
hectare, (iv) ethanol conversion of 260 liters per dry ton of biomass. In this context, and considering a crushing
capacity of 573 million tons in the South-Central region, there are clear opportunities for energy optimization. The
adoption of efficient cogeneration systems (both in more efficient generation and in lower energy consumption
in the production process) in these mills can provide 17 million tons of bagasse and 34 million tons of straw (dry
basis). In this way, they could generate 4.5 billion liters from bagasse and 8.9 billion liters from straw, totaling 13.4
billion liters of 2G ethanol (all additional biomass intended for 2G ethanol production). The values considered by
Raízen are conservative regarding the availability of biomass. More recent studies point to a technical potential of
61 million tons per year (31.4 million tons of bagasse and 29.9 million tons of straw), higher than the estimates
presented above [205].
2.3.4 REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE

Regenerative agriculture is an old concept that has become quite relevant in the last decade, to some extent as
an evolution of organic farming practices [204]. There isn’t a single definition, but rather a number of theoretical
and practical lines of benefits and characterization of what regenerative agriculture is - and they all have the
same emphasis on soil health. The following are the different levels that a production system can reach through
regenerative practices [207]:
The first is the functional level, whose goal is to reverse climate change and regenerate the soil. To this end, good
practices are applied so that agriculture can contribute to “humanity doing good” (a broad term without conceptual
precision used by TerraGenesis International [207]). Level two is integrative, where the goal is to improve the
production system and ecosystems, as well as the soil. This is done by using creativity, combining integrative
design with carbon farming, which means capturing carbon in the soil and vegetation through agricultural and
forestry practices. [208]). Level three is systemic, which uses a living systems approach, and considers flows and
investments in various types of capital.
At this level, the 7 principles of regenerative agriculture are adopted:
1. Working with the whole, not the parts.
2. Design of non-linear and multi-capital reciprocities.
3. Make holistic decisions for specific systems change.
4. Express the unique essence of each person, farm, and location.
5. Continuously evolve in agroecological cultures and processes.
6. Connect the farm to its agro-ecosystem and bioregion.
7. Agriculture changes the world.
The fourth and last level is the evolutionary level: the 7 principles of regenerative agriculture are applied, as well
as networks of regenerative producers, i.e. several farms working together. Practices are connected to the local
context and, even more ambitiously, a regenerative culture is applied, which considers farming as a ritual.
The fastest growing and gaining adherents of all sizes, including large-scale farmers and ranchers, is
functional-level regenerative agriculture, which offers a menu of conservation practices indicating benefits for
both ecosystems and agricultural production. Conventional practices are not forbidden at this level, with a focus
on constantly moving toward more regenerative practices. Also regarding definitions, the literature and practice
of regenerative agriculture can define or classify models based on outcomes, processes, or both [206]. Processes
refer to the various practices adopted, such as green manure, no-till farming, and integration with livestock,
while the outcome-based practices involve capturing carbon, improving biodiversity, and other concrete results
generated by the practices. Some definitions combine processes and results; therefore, they are concerned with
the practices adopted as well as the ecological and productive results. One of the lines that is very widespread is
that of the Rodale Institute, a pioneering organization in the research and dissemination of organic agriculture,
based in Pennsylvania, USA.
As an evolution of the practices adopted by the Rodale Institute, regenerative organic agriculture was
consolidated in 2019 with the launch of the Regenerative Organic Certification, which is based on 3 pillars:
soil health, animal welfare, and social justice [209]. In the soils pillar, this line shows different combinations
of conservation agriculture practices that include crop rotation, composting, no-till farming, or minimum
tillage. Other regenerative agriculture lines are more specific and include permaculture concepts and holistic
management. The first is strongly related to breaking conventional and large-scale farming patterns, based on
alternative design, which in practice is applied on a small scale and based on concepts that are not scientifically
proven. Holistic farm management incorporates concepts of improved soil, nutritional quality of food, contribution
to biodiversity and climate change mitigation, and social benefits for the local community [210]. Given the difficulty
in defining and standardizing the term, there are limits to how regenerative agriculture can be supported by public
policy or even to how consumers can recognize and support its adoption via certifications [206]. This consensus on
definitions and approaches can still be reached, given that it is a recent term.
Sugarcane production in Brazil already makes extensive use of various regenerative practices, and can easily
be classified as level 1 of functional regenerative agriculture. As a semi-perennial crop that is highly efficient in
producing biomass and thus extensively covering the soil, coupled with good soil cultivation practices, sugarcane
meets the basic requirements in regenerative agriculture.
Much of the Brazilian sugarcane production also adopts level 2 practices, since, in addition to good soil cultivation
practices, agro-industrial waste is used to replace synthetic fertilizers and the use of water is efficient (as seen in
the circular economy section). Because of the importance given to carbon by the industry and the value assigned
to all organic matter resulting from sugarcane, there is a lot of research and advances in good soil management
practices, as previously shown.
Raízen uses several regenerative practices. The main objective of these practices is to maintain and enrich the
organic matter of the soil, which is carbon farming. Keeping straw mulch on the soil and other soil conservation
techniques, growing leguminous species in the off-season, and integrated pest management (IPM) that includes
biological control are some of these practices, as indicated in Raízen’s Manual of Good Practices for Sustainable
Sugarcane Production [211]. The use of the Trichogramma to control the sugarcane borer, its main pest, is common
practice both in Raízen’s own areas and in the areas of suppliers. This reduces the use of agrochemicals, which,
when used, follow all the rules so as not to impact water or biodiversity (and the health of workers). Suppliers
use 41 climate-friendly farming practices according to the Climate Smart Index - CSI [212]. More important than
its widespread use is that it is constantly expanding, and it is monitored by a supplier management support
program—the ELO Program—which has identified growing supplier adherence to these good practices.
IN THIS WAY, RAÍZEN AND ITS SUPPLIERS HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUSLY IMPROVING THEIR
AGRICULTURAL PRACTICES AND MAKING THEM INCREASINGLY BENEFICIAL FOR THE SOIL,
BIODIVERSITY, AND LOCAL COMMUNITIES. THIS CONSTANT EVOLUTION OF PRACTICES IS ONE OF THE
PRINCIPLES OF REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE. THE COMPANY’S GOOD PRACTICES ARE DISSEMINATED
TO OTHER FARMS AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITIES. IN THIS WAY, THEY ARE TAKING INTO ACCOUNT
AND POSITIVELY IMPACTING THE AGRO-ECOSYSTEM. THEREFORE, RAÍZEN’S ACTIONS FALL UNDER THE
THIRD LEVEL OF REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE, WHICH IS PRACTICED AT A SYSTEMIC LEVEL.
2.4 LAND USE AND PRODUCTION AT RAÍZEN

RAÍZEN IS LOCATED IN REGIONS WHERE FORESTS ARE GROWING AND IS A LEADER

IN THE MAIN LAND-SAVING TECHNOLOGIES THAT WILL ENABLE LEAPS IN PRODUCTIVITY
PER HECTARE BY MAXIMIZING THE USE OF WASTE (2G, PELLETS, BIOGAS,
AND BIOELECTRICITY).
2.4.1 RAÍZEN AS A VECTOR FOR THE RECOVERY OF NATIVE VEGETATION
87% of the areas that supply Raízen with sugarcane are located in municipalities that registered an increase
in forest areas between 2008 and 2018. Figure 28 shows the change in vegetation in each municipality in the
states where Raízen has at least one mill. The colors represent the change in natural forest cover from 2008 to
2018 in each municipality. To facilitate interpretation, the change in vegetation was divided by the total area of the
municipality, and we plotted the locations of the mills instead of the sugarcane areas. A minimum threshold was
also considered (areas with changes of less than 5 hectares or less than 0.1% vegetation variation were excluded
and are shown on the map in white color). By superimposing the location of Raízen’s mills (blue dots) on this map,
we can see that they are located in a region where recovery of natural vegetation was greater than suppression
over these years. Calculations indicate that 77% of the areas that supply sugarcane to Raízen are located in
municipalities where there was an expansion of natural forests between 2008 and 2018. If planted forests are
included, this percentage increases to 87%. This detailed information for Raízen corroborates the evidence for the
sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector.
Figure 28 - Location of Raizen’s mills in relation to vegetation suppression and regeneration

from 2008 to 2018
Source: Agroicone, based on MapBiomas (2020) [164], IBGE (2016) and Raízen.
Raízen is a pioneer in the adoption of voluntary sustainability programs that require environmental compliance
and deforestation-free supply chains. As we will see in the following sections, Raízen has strongly supported the
creation of the Bonsucro scheme, which, in addition to requiring compliance with environmental standards, since
2008 has not accepted products from areas with high carbon stocks or high biodiversity.
Raízen contributes to the Sustainable Development Goals - SDG related to land use. The strong commitment
to establishing best practices that increase carbon and biodiversity in soils, and to improving sustainable land
management such as native vegetation on sugarcane farms, contribute to the achievement of Sustainable
Development Goals (SDG) number 13 (Climate action) and 15 (Life on land).
2.4.2 LAND-SAVING TECHNOLOGIES AT RAÍZEN

Better use of straw would make it possible to increase Raízen’s 2G ethanol production. At Raízen, 88% of
sugarcane is processed in mills with room for significant improvements in energy efficiency. By mapping real
opportunities at these facilities, it is estimated that they have more than 3 million tons of bagasse that could
be used to generate steam and produce 2G ethanol. In addition to opportunities to increase energy efficiency,
sugarcane straw is an important source of biomass, capable of adding nearly 1 million tons of bagasse equivalent
to Raízen’s production (in 400,000 hectares) [213].
With an eye on opportunities involving waste, Raízen has built an innovative system that indicates the optimal
levels for straw collection for each region while respecting soil properties and the balance of nutrients.
The purpose of the system is to explore the viability of recovering straw from the field and determine the right
amount to be collected. This system takes into account different realities of sugarcane cultivation in the South-
Central region and is now part of the company’s strategy for new projects.
Recently, Raízen initiated the activities of the first plant in the world to convert, on a commercial scale, filter
cake and vinasse (sugarcane by-products) into raw material to produce biogas and generate electricity.
In a biodigester, the organic raw material is converted through bacterial activity into a mixture of methane and
CO2. This biogas is suitable for use in power generators and to fuel truck fleets as a substitute for diesel. Once
purified, biogas has the same characteristics as natural gas (96.5% methane) and can therefore be used, in
the form of biomethane, to replace diesel as fuel for cars, tractors, and trucks, an initiative that is in line with
RenovaBio’s resolutions. However, there is also the option to further purify the biogas to 95% methane, which can
be a substitute for natural gas for industrial and domestic use. The plant has the capacity to produce 138,000 MWh
per year, enough to supply, for example, the municipality of Guariba and nearby cities in the interior of the state
of São Paulo [214], [215].
Sugarcane bagasse pellets as a land-saving technology provide energy without requiring additional land.
Bagasse pellets can be used as a substitute for coal and natural gas in thermoelectric power generation. Bagasse
pellets are simply the organic matter from compressed biomass, transformed into biofuel. Raízen has a pellet
production plant located next to the Diamante Mill in Jaú, São Paulo. The plant has the capacity to produce 100,000
tons of bagasse and straw pellets and the first exports occurred in 2020 [216]. Unlike its competitor (wood pellets),
which can come from energy forests dedicated to their production, surplus bagasse from the sugarcane crushing
process is a by-product from the mills and does not require additional land to be produced.
23
The sugarcane areas are generally located at a distance of no more than 50 km from the mills.
3 RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS
Human rights and working conditions in Brazil: companies adapting to strict rules. The list of human rights
guaranteed by international law is extensive, and labor rights are no longer an exception. Effective protection of
human rights at work—freedom of organization and collective bargaining, fair minimum wages, proper and safe
working conditions, non-discrimination, among others—are key to promoting inclusive and sustainable economic
growth, including employment and decent work. Brazil has a comprehensive Occupational Health and Safety
(OHS) System with strict rules to protect and promote the safety, health, and well-being of workers.
Human rights have always been a delicate issue in agriculture, including in the sugarcane sector, mainly because
its production is concentrated in poor countries and regions (the large production in the state of São Paulo and in
the South-Central region of Brazil is an exception). It is therefore essential to understand and manage the human
rights impacts caused by direct operations and extended supply chains. Despite the challenges to address the
issue of human rights, given its complex nature and interrelationships with many different norms and positions,
some are highlighted here, with an emphasis on labor practices.
Before exploring these topics in depth, it should be noted that this section does not cover the full thematic potential
of human rights.
3.1 BRAZIL - HUMAN RIGHTS AND WORKING CONDITIONS:

O SR H U M A N R I G H T S
COMPANIES ADAPTING TO STRICT RULES

As one of the founding members of the International Labor Organization (ILO), Brazil has internally adopted
most of its fundamental conventions involving issues such as forced or compulsory labor, minimum age for
employment, and non-discrimination [217]. The ILO is the United Nations agency responsible for developing and
enforcing international labor standards in the form of conventions and recommendations.
By ratifying ILO Conventions 29 and 105, Brazil has made an international commitment to abolish the practice of
forced or compulsory labor in all its forms. Between the 1930s and the 1960s, the members of the ILO, including
A NFO
Brazil, decided to adopt Convention no. 29 on the eradication of forced or compulsory labor in all its forms within
the shortest possible time, and Convention no. 105 on the abolition of forced or compulsory labor [218]. In this
CT
S SHPUEM
process, members also agreed to the common definition of forced or compulsory labor as “all work or service
which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty (e.g. confiscation of identity documents,
beatings, torture) and for which the said person has not offered himself voluntarily .
RE
R E S P E I TO P E LO S D I R E I TO
At the national level, the definition of modern slavery goes beyond the concept of forced or compulsory labor
recognized by the ILO. In Brazil, Federal Law No. 10,803/2003 goes beyond the international definition of forced
labor [219] and was expanded to cover internal trafficking, bonded labor, and degrading working conditions, in
addition to restriction of freedom as defined by the ILO. Article 149 of the Brazilian Penal Code qualifies compulsory
labor as crime. Those responsible for imposing exhausting working hours, degrading conditions, or restricting
freedom of movement are punished with imprisonment of up to eight years, termination of the employment
contract, payment of compensation, and unemployment insurance for the victims.
To ensure that organizations and individuals that commit such crimes are identified and held accountable, Federal
Decree 4,552/2002 [220] grants labor inspectors broad authority to take the following measures: i) inspect the
workplace, even without any prior notice or authorization; ii) analyze copies of books, files, and other documents
in electronic or physical format; iii) interview employees and workers about any matter related to compliance with
the legislation; iv) order the closure of the establishment, machinery, and electrical systems, etc. [221].
BRAZIL’S ‘BLACK LIST’ PROMOTES TRANSPARENCY IN THE SUPPLY
CHAIN REGARDING COMPULSORY LABOR.
The ‘Black List’ is recognized by the United Nations as a key transparency tool to combat current slavery in
Brazilian supply chains and to enforce laws and regulations [220]. Created through Ordinance 540/2004, the
‘Black List’ is a public registry that is updated by the Ministry of Economy and publishes the names of companies
and individual employers accused by labor inspectors of exploiting workers in slavery conditions. The names of
the employers are included in the ‘Black List’ after their administrative appeals have been denied. The companies
or individuals included in this list will be monitored for two years. The name of the employer can be removed from
the list, as long as any fines, labor and social security charges, or compensation have been paid and the violation
is not repeated. If no recurrence occurs within two years, and the corresponding compensation is duly paid, their
names can be removed from the registry. Violators whose names appear on the List are prevented from obtaining
loans from public banks, such as Caixa Economica Federal. The list was updated, revised, and published in April
2020 [223]. The recently adopted version listed 152 companies and individuals. There are no cases related to the
sugarcane chain.
BRAZIL HAS A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF STRICT

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY REGULATIONS.
R E S P E CT FO R H U M A N R I G H T S
All workers are entitled to safe and healthy working conditions, regardless of their position or levels of
exposure to risk in the course of their activities. Workplace safety and well-being are considered fundamental
rights guaranteed by the Federal Constitution of 1988. To provide adequate conditions to ensure a workers’ safety,
employers must provide insurance coverage for their workforce and comply with the health and safety regulations
that include, among others, providing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), offering specific training on work-
related risks, and ensuring the payment of Risk Bonuses and Health Allowances to all eligible workers.
These stricter safety rules and the proper conditions to ensure health and well-being are mainly addressed by the
national legislation through the Regulatory Standards (NRs - Normas Regulamentadoras). Today, a total of 37 NRs
regulate and provide technical guidelines on mandatory procedures and risk management, applicable to various
types of work environments. Non-compliance with the NRs is investigated and can result in fines, partial or total
closure of the workplace, and even the employer being held liable in Criminal Court, depending on the level of risk
to which the worker’s safety is exposed.
3.2 SUGAR, ETHANOL, AND BIOENERGY SECTOR - ENSURING GOOD WORKING

CONDITIONS AND IMPROVING PRACTICES
The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector has been marked by profound transformations in its labor relations,
shifting to less labor-intensive production due to mechanization. Today, mechanization is used in 97% of the
sugarcane areas in the South-Central region of the country and 99% at Raízen, further contributing to the
reduction of GHG emissions. In 2007, the signing of the Agri-Environmental Protocol for the Sugar, Ethanol, and
Bioenergy Sector between the private sector and the state government of São Paulo was a major step towards
eliminating the practice of pre-harvest burning of sugarcane in the state. Improved technologies and new
management strategies have enabled farmers to accelerate the harvest mechanization process. The use of trucks
in the field led to a reduction in the number of workers needed for the harvest. In the South-Central region, the
percentage of mechanized harvesting increased from 48% to 97% from 2009-2010 up to the current harvest, while
in Brazil it reached 89%, according to data from Companhia Nacional de Abastecimento – CONAB [19] (Figure 29).
Figure 29 - Percentage of
mechanized harvesting in
Brazil
Source: CONAB (2020) [19].

The increasing use of mechanization in sugarcane harvesting has significantly improved working conditions
and safety at work. The goal of reducing burning and converting to mechanized harvesting has reduced the need
for employees to perform certain routine tasks, especially those involving manual harvesting. The elimination
of this practice caused the displacement of thousands of workers with low levels of education, who faced the
challenge of retraining.
In 10 years, the number of accidents in the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector has decreased by approximately
70%. In Brazil, stricter rules and regulations have led to major transformations in the sugarcane agribusiness.
Good practices and improvements in working conditions have resulted in a drop in the number of accidents in the
sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector. In 2018, accidents in sugarcane cultivation accounted for only 17% of total
accidents in the industry. This number has been falling in recent years, mainly due to the increased mechanization
process in the agricultural phase.
To support retraining and help these workers to take on new roles within the mills or in other sectors, the sugar,
ethanol, and bioenergy sector launched the “RenovAção” program. The goal was to provide professional training to
workers who performed manual harvesting and reassign them to new positions, such as electricians, mechanics,
and truck drivers, thereby promoting a professional transition.
THE RENOVAÇÃO PROGRAM IS AN INITIATIVE OF THE PRIVATE SUGARCANE SECTOR

TO RETRAIN WORKERS AND REINTEGRATE THEM INTO THE LABOR MARKET,
DESPITE THE ADVANCE OF MECHANIZED SUGARCANE HARVESTING.
The RenovAção Program was recognized by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) for its
efforts to combine renewable energy production with social inclusion. Coordinated by the Brazilian Sugarcane
Industry Association (UNICA) and the Federation of Rural Employees of the State of São Paulo (FERAESP),
RenovAção was launched in 2009. Since its inception, the project has focused on providing vocational technical
courses, training, and providing assistance in retraining to mitigate the impact of mechanization among community
members and former manual sugarcane harvesters, including women and illiterate and semi-literate individuals.
The initiative helped retrain approximately 6,650 workers directly and was replicated by companies associated
with UNICA; training continued and indirectly qualified more than 28,000 workers in other activities such as
electricians, mechanics, and truck drivers, promoting professional transition [224].
Besides the actions conducted by Brazilian organizations, the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector is part of the
global transformations and is following the paths for sustainability; private multi-sector certifications are an
important approach in this agenda. Bonsucro is a global non-profit organization dedicated to promoting compliance
with regulations on human rights, labor standards and all other aspects related to the sustainability of the supply
chain in the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy industry. At the end of 2019, Bonsucro’s membership list included more
than 553 organizations based in 51 countries, including UNICA and Raízen as active Board members. [31].
BONSUCRO CERTIFICATION IS A GLOBALLY RECOGNIZED

TOOL TO ASSESS AND MEASURE THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE SUGARCANE PRODUCTION
CHAIN AND DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS IN PRODUCTION.
Based on the principle “what gets measured gets managed,” Bonsucro certifies the production of sugarcane and
its co-products. It also stimulates market demand for the adoption of sustainable standards that drive greater
environmental and social responsibility of companies while integrating them with the economic viability of the
business, since these are relevant aspects for companies.
The compliance of mills and farms with sustainability criteria is assessed by agencies that are accredited and
approved by Bonsucro through the application of established principles and indicators. To obtain certification,
sugar and ethanol mills must demonstrate compliance with at least 80% of the indicators and meet the following
criteria: i) continuous improvement of key business areas; ii) development of production and processing efficiencies;
iii) management of biodiversity and ecosystem services; iv) compliance with national legislation or regulations; v)
respect for human rights and labor standards; and iv) where applicable, adherence to European Union guidelines
(Bonsucro Audit Guidance for Production Standard – Version 3.0 March 2011).
Although the list is not exhaustive (Table 6), it illustrates the most relevant criteria and indicators that are taken
into consideration to ensure respect for human rights and labor standards in the sugarcane sector, according to
the Bonsucro Standard:
Table 6- Criteria and Indicators of the Bonsucro Standard

Source: Bonsucro (2011) [225].
3.3 WORKING CONDITIONS AT RAÍZEN AND ITS SUPPLY CHAIN

Raízen’s sugarcane production includes its own areas and areas belonging to suppliers, in a 50% ratio. To
achieve and guarantee human rights and good labor conditions throughout its chain, the company adopts two
different, albeit complementary, strategies: the Bonsucro Standard and the ELO Program. For its own production,
in those cases where Raízen leases land and plants and grows sugarcane, the Bonsucro Standard establishes
guidelines for assessing impacts on the environment, working conditions, and efficient production methods. As
for the production of sugarcane suppliers whose operations are not controlled by the company, the ELO program
stimulates compliance with legislation, sustainability, and continuous improvement.
A) BONSUCRO
RAÍZEN CURRENTLY HAS 24.7 MILLION TONS OF CANE CERTIFIED BY BONSUCRO,

WHICH REPRESENTS 99.9% OF ITS OWN SUGARCANE PRODUCTION AND THE LARGEST
VOLUME CERTIFIED BONSUCRO IN THE WORLD. FOR THE 2021/22 HARVEST,
RAÍZEN INTENDS TO CERTIFY 100% OF THE 22 PLANTS IN OPERATION [226], [227].
The Bonsucro seal is a strong and voluntary international certification that ensures effective compliance
with environmental, social, and economic criteria for the cultivation of sugarcane and the production of
its by-products through a reliable and transparent process, advocating for human rights and compliance
with labor standards.
Raízen was the first company in the world to be certified by the Bonsucro Standard and to undertake
to having its units certified according to the Standard. Raízen’s volume accounts for more than 30% of
the total volume of certified sugarcane in the world. As part of its sustainability initiatives, Raízen has
committed to adopting the Bonsucro Standard for all of its sugarcane mills in operation by 2021. In June
2011, Raízen’s mill in Maracaí became the first to have its sugarcane production certified by Bonsucro.
[31].
B) ELO PROGRAM
THE ELO PROGRAM IS AN UNPRECEDENTED INITIATIVE IN THE GLOBAL SUGARCANE

PRODUCTION CHAIN AND PROMOTES THE SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF RAÍZEN’S
ACTIVE SUGARCANE SUPPLIERS.
The ELO Program was implemented in partnership with two internationally recognized institutions—
Imaflora and Solidaridad—and looks to involve active sugarcane suppliers in important initiatives that
address the three pillars of sustainability: environmental, social, and economic. These pillars are supported
by 17 themes and cover aspects related to Business, Environment, Culture and People, including risk and
accident prevention, improved service to suppliers, safety in the use of agrochemicals, pest management,
conservation of land use ( Table 7) [212].
Table 7- The 17 aspects covered by the ELO Program

Source: Raízen (2020)
Nearly 2,000 sugarcane suppliers participate in the ELO Program. They account for 99,6% of the
volume purchased by Raízen from third parties through long-term contracts. The ELO Program is a
disseminator of good practices that have been transforming rural properties and consists of technical
assistance and frequent field visits to suppliers.
Professionals appointed by Raízen make recommendations to suppliers about potential improvements,

based on the needs identified during technical support visits, and provide assistance in prioritizing and
implementing effective planning and investment actions in their properties. A continuous improvement
process is then initiated, in line with the guidelines and criteria that cover social, environmental, and
economic aspects and, therefore, meet the company’s intent to ensure the sustainable development of its
supply chain.
Currently, the ELO Program is structured in phases, allowing Raízen’s field team to interact with
suppliers:
1. Diagnostic of the farm to assess and better understand the actual status of the economic, environmental,
and social sustainability of farms.
2. Identification of opportunities for improvement, which fosters a culture of continuous improvement for
every supplier.
3. Individual feedback and development of guidelines, tailored to the individual challenges faced by
suppliers to deal with business continuity and to anticipate requirements to achieve a sustainable
supply chain.
24
The figures presented throughout the report do not include the BIOSEV mills, which are under incorporation. Approval by the regulatory agencies is
expected to be formalized in the first half of 2021.
4. Technical support and monitoring activities throughout the crop year, based on needs and requirements.
5. Engagement in continuous improvement: involvement with associations, organization of events and

lectures, promotion and dissemination of knowledge, among others.
The ELO program addresses the challenges faced not only by producers, but also by professionals who
provide services to farmers. In 2019, the program began to offer support to professionals who provide
services to producers, which helped expand its reach to an additional link in the chain. Currently, the
program goes beyond what was initially proposed and includes additional practices related to legislation,
such as integrated pest control and fire prevention. Raízen continually invests to train its internal team,
which was expanded to 20 professionals in the 2019 crop year to better serve suppliers.
Over the years, Raízen has continuously invested in the ELO Program and recognized the continuous
improvement efforts of sugarcane suppliers. The ELO Program is in its sixth harvest season and, in
the last three alone (2017/2018, 2018/2019, and 2019/2020), Raízen invested close to R$16.5 million. The
program directly involved a team of 25 people (responsible for field visits and strategic/administrative
support) and, indirectly, 150 people from other areas, such as Legal; Communications; Health, Safety
and Environment; and Agriculture. The program also engaged three company vice presidencies and
implemented a governance system, through which the company’s shareholders analyze its progress
through quarterly meetings. The success and level of involvement achieved in its implementation are
critical for the progressive adoption of measures that encourage and support economic sustainability and
respect for the environment, and human and labor rights.
The ELO program benefits not only Raízen and its suppliers, but also society and the sugar, ethanol,
and bioenergy sector as a whole. In early 2020, the program was chosen by the United Nations Economic
Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) to be included in its repository of transformative
programs capable of contributing to an inclusive and sustainable economic development. The ELO program
was considered an example of the “Big Push for Sustainability” in the sugarcane production chain, since it
involves close to 2,000 suppliers in the coordination of investments for sustainable development, through
the mobilization of its own contributions and by fostering inspiring initiatives by the company on the
properties of these suppliers.
Raízen has significant potential to encourage sustainability. Considering the last harvest (2019/2020)
alone, the total volume of sugarcane crushed by the company (61,4 million tons) [228] equaled more than
10% of the volume processed in the South-Central region (611 million tons), Brazil’s largest producing
region [229]. Given that 50% of the volume of sugarcane processed by the company comes from sugarcane
suppliers and that 99% of the volume comes from producers who are part of the ELO Program, we can say
that the ELO Program has a positive influence on almost 5% of the country’s sugarcane production.
Figure 30 - ELO Program Timeline

Raízen also has other certifications related to sustainability, regulatory standards, and food safety
programs:
- ISO/IEC – 17025: International standard for laboratory tests applicable to calibration and testing
laboratories, accredited by the National Institute of Metrology, Quality, and Technology [230].
- ISCC - International Sustainability & Carbon Certification (ISCC), which ensures compliance with
European Union parameters for sustainable production in the Renewable Energy Directive (RED) (EU-RL
2009/28/ EC) [231].
- ISO 9001:2015 – Internationally recognized standard that certifies the Quality Management System (QMS)
and attests to the company’s ability to provide products and services that meet the needs of customers and
legal and applicable regulatory requirements (28 certified units) [232].
- ISO 14001 – Environmental Management System: The ISO 14001 standard is internationally recognized
and accepted. It defines the requirements for putting an environmental management system in place and
helps improve business performance through efficient use of resources and reduction in the amount of
waste generated, gaining competitive advantage and stakeholder confidence [233] .
- Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) - registration with the US Environmental Protection Agency - a
requirement for the marketing of ethanol biofuel in that country (20 certified mills) [34].
- California Air Resources Board (CARB) - California State regulatory body (U.S.) that oversees the
compliance of fuel production and transportation in line with the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, in force in
that state (14 certified mills) [234].
- Sedex - Platform for storing, sharing with, and communicating to customers, information on production
and quality. The platform verifies the ethical, environmental, and social practices of its suppliers to manage
risk and protect corporate reputation [235].
- HALAL Certification – International certification that ensures production standards in accordance with
Islamic food laws (Halal) [236].
- Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) – This certification guarantees the entire food manufacturing
processes, as well as their compliance with regulations related to food safety [237].
- Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) - Is the systematic approach to ensuring that food
is safe for consumers from a sanitary standpoint [238].
- Integrated Pest Management (IPM) – An ecosystem-based strategy that focuses on the long-term
pest control or their damage through a combination of techniques such as biological control, habitat
manipulation, modification of practices, and use of resistant varieties [239].
- FSSC 22000: Food Safety and Management System, recognized by the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI),
based on the requirements of ISO 22000 and ISO/TS 22002-1.
Raízen’s contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals - SDG related to human rights. The adoption
of good practices and the implementation of programs that fully promote and respect human rights,
including the health and well-being of workers and the eradication of forced and child labor contribute to
Sustainable Development Goal No. 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
In addition to strict compliance with Brazilian labor laws, Raízen adopted the Bonsucro Standard—which
guarantees full compliance with its production processes—and developed the ELO Program, which
provides assistance to sugarcane farms to improve working conditions.
4 APPROACH TO CIRCULAR ECONOMY
Circular economy has increasingly proved to be a new model to reconcile large-scale production, sustainable
development, and the limited availability of natural resources. It is not a goal, but rather a general concept that
improves awareness by rethinking the lifecycle of products and services. As a new production model, industries
and companies must prepare for this transition based on current efforts and initiatives in the areas of sustainability
and innovation. Risks and opportunities arise throughout the transition, and the sugarcane industry is prepared
to capture several opportunities. Throughout the sugarcane production process, by-products such as bagasse,
straw, vinasse, and filter cake are converted and reused to generate new products (2G ethanol, bioelectricity,
biogas, biomethane, and pellets), creating a true circular economy.
4.1 BRAZIL IN THE ERA OF CIRCULAR ECONOMY: LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND BUSINESS
MODELS THAT DRIVE CIRCULARITY
It is estimated that today’s global economy is only 9% circular and that it is advancing linearly, which indicates
a pressing need to alter this trend. This number is far below the level needed to deal with global crises and
reach the goals set out in the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). Based on available
metrics and concepts, the circularity of countries, sectors, and companies can be assessed, thereby creating
paths for improvement. It is estimated that the European Union is 12% circular and, as a developed economy,
A P P R OAC H TO C I R C U L A R E C O N O M Y
two paths are indicated to increase circularity in the future: sustaining and preserving what is already built and
using waste as a resource. China’s situation is different, estimated as a 2% circular economy due to its main focus
on creating new housing and infrastructure. The country can focus on new projects for the future and prioritize
regeneration and waste as resources [240].
The circular economy provides the basis for separating economic activity from consumption of limited
resources, based on three principles: eliminating waste and pollution, keeping products and materials in
use, and regenerating natural systems. The circular economy is based on different lines of thinking and can
have different definitions. The definition presented by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development
(WBCSD) is: “Circular economy is an economic model that is regenerative in principle. The goal is to retain the
value of resources, products, parts, and materials in circulation by creating a system with innovative business
models that enable long service life, optimal reuse, renewability, recovery, remanufacturing, and recycling.
By applying these principles, organizations can collaborate to eliminate waste, increase resource productivity,
and keep resources in use within the limits of the planet.” Currently, the principles of circular economy are the
foundation for sustainable enterprises [241].
As a global challenge, the three actions needed to close the circularity gap are: 1- Promote global collaboration
to collect and share data; 2- Transform global trends into national directives; 3- Create a global coalition for
diverse and inclusive actions [242]. There are several ways to help transition to a circular economy company.
Public policies—agreements, laws and regulations, subsidies, tax-related measures—are important drivers and
have been widely used in some countries and regions, mainly in the European Union.
Brazil is gradually shifting its legal framework toward a circular economy. The National Solid Waste Law (Federal
Law No. 12,305/2010) sets out a series of instruments and actions for the development of integrated waste
management, providing important elements for some approaches to the circular economy. The law is designed
to encourage reverse logistics and recycling, reduce waste generation, and promote shared responsibilities
for waste management and disposal. Reverse logistics systems are mandatory for manufacturers; importers;
distributors; and resellers of pesticides, their packaging and waste; batteries; tires; lubricating oils, their residue
and packaging; fluorescent, sodium and mercury vapor lamps, and mixed light bulbs; and electronic products and
their components [243].
The National Water Resources Policy (Federal Law 9433/1997) contributes to efficient management of water
resources through its various uses and the inclusion of the watershed scale for governance. Use of water
(withdrawal for consumption, organic discharge, etc.) from any source is permitted by water authorities. Charging
for use and charging mechanisms were introduced through this law and implemented on a watershed level.
Some of the watershed under greatest water stress have already established charges and rates [244]. Piracicaba-
Capivari-Jundiaí (PCJ), an important sugarcane production unit, was among the first. Legal frameworks provide a
good foundation for efficient water use, but do not directly contribute to water reuse.
Business models and value chains are other approaches for the transition to circularity, and several business
organizations are defining strategies and tools at national, industry, or local level. Policies available for value
chains refer to resource and energy recovery, Product-as-a-Service, digital technologies, sharing, circular inputs,
circularity-oriented design, energy recovery, industrial symbiosis, and extension of product life. Brazilian industries
are connected to the circular transition, and private sector organizations have reflected on how to move forward
based on sharing of cases and lessons learned [245] and evaluating bottlenecks, proposing solutions [243]. Some
of these business cases will be presented in the next session, applied to the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector.
4.2 THE SECTOR AND RAÍZEN – SUGAR, ETHANOL, AND BIOENERGY SECTOR, CIRCULAR
BY NATURE AND TECHNOLOGY
ALL BY-PRODUCTS OF THE SUGARCANE PRODUCTION PROCESS ARE CONVERTED

INTO NEW PRODUCTS AND CREATE A TRUE CIRCULAR ECONOMY.
• Sugarcane is a highly resilient plant that plays an important role in a circular and
sustainable economy.
• The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector is circular by nature as well as technological,
since it captures solar energy and CO2 and transforms them into several useful products
with minimal impact.
• Raízen is at the forefront of business circularity, using its basic principles to accelerate
growth, increase competitiveness, and mitigate risks. These principles were highlighted
in the WBCSD circular economy business cases, and we will cover each of them from the
standpoint of the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector.
4.2.1 CIRCULARITY IN THE SUGAR, ETHANOL, AND BIOENERGY SECTOR
In the last decade, this sector underwent a business transformation process, moving from the trading of
sugar and ethanol to a sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector. This transformation stems from the adoption of
technology and the significant improvements in the total use of its main raw material, sugarcane. As a result, the
sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector created additional revenue from existing processes, spurred new product
innovation, and reduced operating costs. By using bagasse to produce electricity, the sector significantly reduced
waste and contributed to clean energy. Ethanol was already an important revenue stream and, with the addition of
cogeneration from bagasse, energy production became even more important.
Innovation of new products and processes is an incredible journey in this sector, with significant achievements
and potential for the era of bioeconomy and the circular economy. The sugarcane industry is circular in nature,
capturing solar energy and CO2 through photosynthesis as its main source of energy and transforming it into a
variety of useful products with minimal impact. Three technological edge groups were used in the sugar, ethanol,
and bioenergy sector in Brazil: the main one is ethanol technology, and the other two are in a development phase,
namely, by-products and other technologies based on cellulosic materials [246]. Several fields of knowledge have
contributed to innovation in the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector, such as agriculture and plant sciences,
fuels, chemistry, biochemistry and molecular biology, engineering, and genetics.
Improvements in the way bagasse is used are being developed through different technological approaches,
yielding greater efficiency in boilers to increase energy cogeneration and the production of second-generation
ethanol from sugarcane bagasse and straw. More than 260 patents relating to second-generation ethanol, with
an emphasis on lignocellulosic biomass, had been registered by 2015. 2G ethanol is not yet mainstream due to
its economic feasibility, and Raízen is a world pioneer in this type of production at its plant located in Piracicaba,
São Paulo. 2G ethanol has the potential to significantly reduce emissions compared to the Brazilian 1G ethanol
standard (50% more ethanol from the same raw material). In the future, 2G ethanol may play a key role for the
global bioeconomy.
The company also produces biogas from industrial waste (vinasse and filter cake) for power generation at a plant in
Guariba, São Paulo. Subsequently, this same industrial waste is used as organic agricultural fertilizers, replacing
the use of additional synthetic fertilizers, as described in detail later in this section. The estimated potential
for energy production from vinasse and other by-products is very large. In the state of São Paulo, Brazil’s main
producing state, this energy potential could: “i) replace 80% of the natural gas consumed in the state; or ii) replace
70% of all diesel consumed in São Paulo; or iii) supply 93% of the state’s demand for residential electricity.”
Sugarcane bagasse pellets are also produced and can replace coal, natural gas, and fuel oil—important non-
renewable forms of energy worldwide. The high yield of sugarcane in Brazil and the fact that it is produced from
waste make bagasse pellets very attractive for energy transition.
The characteristics of sugarcane bagasse depend on genetics and field conditions, with an average of 37%
cellulose, 28% hemicellulose, 21% lignin, and 14% other components. Given the growing importance of bagasse
for energy production, sugarcane varieties with a higher percentage of cellulose already exist for better energy
performance. Lignocellulosic materials are transformed into fermentable sugars during hydrolysis and then into
ethanol. The three hydrolysis techniques (concentrated acid, diluted acid, and enzymatic) are being improved and
may define the commercial use and economic viability of 2G ethanol [247].
Several technological innovations in biotechnology could lead to a revolution in terms of biofuels and bioproducts,
expanding the applicability of circular economy. In this sense, it is important to point out the role of biorefineries,
which integrate which integrate processes for converting biomass and biofuels, chemical inputs, materials, food,
feed, and energy. The development and dissemination of biorefineries is a solution to optimize the use of resources
and minimize waste, and are part of the RD&I (Research, Development & Innovation) agenda of most developed
countries and also of Brazil [78].
Sugarcane products are increasingly becoming a source of renewable plastics and other new products that
replace materials made from fossil raw materials. The versatility of this tropical crop has been increasingly
proven through several new applications at different phases of economic feasibility and production scale.
Bioplastics made from sugarcane are used in several applications, and the ethanol produced by Raízen is used as
a biosolvent. The possibilities for using sugarcane products instead of fossil raw materials are huge, and plastic
may be the most obvious. The environmental cost of plastics has been assessed and it is increasing, and there
is a pressing need to find alternatives. Used primarily as short cycle of the first use, 95% of the value of plastic
packaging material, or US$80-120 billion annually, is lost to the economy and only 14% of plastic packaging is
collected for recycling. Experts in circular economy recommend creating effective post-use economy for plastics
by significantly reducing plastics in natural systems and dissociating plastics from fossil raw materials [248].
Innovation is a key element of the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy industry in Brazil, bringing together private
companies, research centers, and universities. São Paulo’s Research Support Foundation (FAPESP) finances
the Bioenergy Research Program (BIOEN), which includes five divisions: Biomass Research, with a focus on
sugarcane, including plant processing and cultivation of sugarcane; Industrial Ethanol Technologies; Biorefinery
Technologies and Ethanol Chemistry; Applications of Ethanol for Motor Vehicles (Otto cycle engines and fuel cells);
and Impact Research - Social and economic, environmental, land use, and intellectual property studies [249].
There are several other examples of research and development initiatives by both public and private organizations.
To provide the framework for innovative projects and drive this increasingly dynamic movement—further
streamlining shared innovation processes in the sector—Raízen created an innovation center, responsible for
supporting the long-term strategy; developing the innovation program, planning and executing the program
within the company; encouraging a disruptive culture in the company; and ensuring the long-term sustainability
of the business. The innovation hub for startups is called Pulse [250], [251], whose goal is to collaborate to bolster
the industry with mature technologies.
Companies in the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector can significantly reduce costs by increasing the use of
waste across the entire production process. For example, the use of vinasse generates savings estimated at one
sixth of the yield of sugarcane production, and cogeneration of energy from the use of bagasse has made the mills
self-sufficient in terms of energy. In addition, they export surplus bioelectricity to the electrical grid. The high
circularity level also reduces exposure to risks since it deals with scarcity of resources, recovering end-of-life
resources and partnering with the public sector.
4.2.2 EXPLORING THE CIRCULAR PROCESS OF SUGARCANE PRODUCTION
To detail how various circular economy concepts Figure 31 - Circularity in the Sugar, Ethanol, and
apply to the sugarcane industry, we will describe Bioenergy Sector
the process and flow of energy, water consumption,
organic matter, and other important inputs, products,
and co-products (Figure 31) . The solid waste
generated during the production process are, in order
of importance (volume): vinasse, bagasse, residual
water, filter cake, ash and soot, and other mixed
waste produced in small volumes.
In modern sugarcane mills, around 99.5% of all solid

waste is reused or recovered [250], an indication of
the high circularity in sugarcane production, which
is represented in, Figure 31. The waste and quantities
in sugarcane production can be found in Table 8.
Source: Agroicone (2020), based on Raízen data (2020).

Table 8 - Waste in sugarcane production
Source: Complementary EIS/EIA report - expansion – Raízen Caarapó S.A. sugar and ethanol [250].
Four cases of the application of circular economy will be detailed below, reflecting industry practices and Raízen’s
specificities.
4.2.2.1 USE AND TOTAL ENERGY PRODUCTION

Sugarcane products have an extremely positive energy balance due to their efficiency in both agricultural and
industrial processes. Many studies estimate the energy balance mainly for ethanol, since its GHG reduction is
very compelling as an alternative to fossil fuels. Sugarcane generates more than nine units of renewable energy
for each unit of fossil energy consumed in the process [252]. The production of electricity from sugarcane bagasse
and its highly efficient energy cycle, with low energy consumption, significantly contributed to making the sugar,
ethanol, and bioenergy sector a successful example of nearly complete energy use.
The sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector is undergoing a technological transformation with more sustainable
production standards and greater efficiency in the reuse of waste. Mechanized sugarcane harvesting was the
great technological change of the last decade. In Brazil, the share of mechanized harvesting increased from 37% in
2008 to 89% in 2019. During the same period, improvements in the mills’ energy systems increased the electricity
surplus from 9.7 to 34.7 kWh/ton of sugarcane in Brazil (257%).
This had a huge impact on GHG emissions and working conditions and offered many opportunities to increase the
use of available biomass through new technologies. This includes greater electricity generation capacity, second-
generation (2G) ethanol production, and renewable pellets for heat generation. These technological changes
are still evolving as a significant part of the waste (bagasse, straw, and vinasse) is used for additional energy
production, depending only on market prices.
4.2.2.2 REUSE OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE AS FERTILIZERS IN SUGARCANE FIELDS
Brazilian sugarcane producers apply relatively little mineral fertilizers due to the large use of industrial waste
available, mainly vinasse and filter cake. Using an average of 460 kilos per hectare, the low use of chemical
fertilizers in Brazilian sugarcane is due to the innovative introduction of organic fertilizers generated during
sugarcane processing. Sugarcane mills recover two important waste streams to replace traditional fertilizers:
filter cake (rich in phosphorus) and vinasse (rich in potassium, organic matter, and other nutrients, such as
nitrogen and phosphorus).
Although the nutrient content of filter cake and vinasse has been known since the 1950s, its use began in the 1970s
and was intensified in the last two decades due to the increase in the prices of chemical fertilizers, combined with
the importance of environmental responsibility (and, therefore, the proper disposal of waste). Ash and bagasse can
also be used as fertilizers. Each liter of ethanol produces 13.7 liters of vinasse [253]. Concentrations of potassium
and other nutrients depend mainly on the raw material used in the production of bioethanol.
To avoid adverse environmental impacts from the use of vinasse, such as salinization, leaching of nitrates from
the soil, and contamination of surface water, several measures must be taken, respecting the maximum volume
per area. The application of vinasse is regulated (CETESB Technical Standard P.4.321) and closely monitored in
the state of São Paulo. Every year, each sugarcane mill must present its Vinasse Application Plan, defining the
methods used to monitor soil and the handling of vinasse. Part of the residual water is also used for fertigation
along with the vinasse.
The use of vinasse considerably increases sugarcane productivity, since it depends on soil fertility and
water supply. Using the maximum allowable dose of vinasse, it is estimated that the sugarcane yield produced
an additional 73t/ha in six years, which corresponds to an additional harvest compared to standard mineral
fertilization [253]. This means that the use of vinasse increases yield by 17%.
Raízen follows a strict protocol in the application of filter cake. The mill uses the infrastructure of its
laboratories for soil and effluents and, in this way, ensures the proper use. Filter cake is generally applied
to the sugarcane fields along with ash, minimizing the use of mineral fertilizers, including those made from
phosphorus, a critical raw material (CRM)[254].
4.2.2.3 EFFICIENT USE AND CLOSED CIRCUIT WATER SYSTEM
Thanks to abundant rainfall, sugarcane is generally not irrigated in the South-Central region of Brazil, where
most of the country’s sugarcane is grown (92% of the 2019/2020 crop production) [19]. Water accounts for more
than two-thirds of the weight of sugarcane, so a significant volume of water reaches the mill inside the sugarcane.
Brazilian mills value efficiency and have reduced the water used during their industrial processing by more than
70% over the last two decades, reaching an average of 1.23 m³ per ton of sugarcane, in the mills that account for
92% of total sugarcane crushed in the South-Central region [255]. New technologies are being developed for a
more efficient use of the water contained in sugarcane, with constant improvements to reduce water withdrawal.
Today, nearly 96,7% of the water consumed by a conventional mill is subsequently treated and reused in the
industrial process, aiming to eliminate water discharge [255].
The water process basically consists of withdrawal, condensation, energy generation (steam), cooling, and
effluents, in addition to several other less important processes (such as washing of equipment and dilution).
About 87% of water use occurs in four processes: sugarcane washing, tank cooling, evaporation condensers, and
ethanol condensers. To recover and reuse water throughout the cycle, several practices are generally adopted in
the sector, aiming to combine:
• Reduction in water consumption.

• Reduction in effluent generation, and
• Energy Conservation.
In the 2015 harvest, Raízen created and implemented the ReduZa program (Reduction in the Use of Water) intended
to reduce withdrawal and consumption of water from external sources (surface and groundwater) by adopting
best water management practices and rational use of water in production processes, including the reduction
of effluent generation to maximize reuse (Figure 32). This is an ongoing program, with defined targets for each
phase, intended to concentrate the best practices identified in all production units in operation and replicate them
in the others.
Figure33 - Benefits of the ReduZa Program Targets are established to reduce specific volumes in
each phase to encourage teams in terms of rational
use of water, with defined Key Performance Indicators
(KPIs), and recognize employees of the teams that
excelled. The program involves: flow measuring, full
understanding of the water balance, successful case
studies, definition of benchmarks, establishment
of annual goals, program dissemination, online
management, and monitoring.
Source: Agroicone (2020), based on Raízen data (2020).
RAÍZEN HAS A CLEAR DIFFERENTIATOR FOR QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY STANDARDS

IN ALL ITS PRODUCTS AND PROCESSES. THIS IS ACHIEVED THROUGH CUSTOMER RELATIONS,
DIALOGUE FOR BILATERAL OPPORTUNITIES, AND PROGRAMS FOR PROACTIVE VISITING,

APPROVAL OF SUPPLIERS, TECHNICAL SUPPORT TO CUSTOMERS,
BEFORE AND AFTER SALES, AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION SURVEY.
Raízen plans to extract the maximum value from water reuse, combining water management with energy
conservation. The mills operate with a focus on maximizing the use of sugarcane water and hot water from the
process, with a consequent reduction in demand for withdrawal of surface and groundwater. In addition to reducing
the volume of water, Raízen recovers the heat from these hot streams, reducing the demand for steam used for
heating through the direct use of hot water to feed the steam/water cycle boilers. This leads to a reduction in fuel
consumption (bagasse). The stored bagasse is used to produce electricity through cogeneration.
Raízen has a strict monitoring system to control water quality throughout the entire production process.
The company monitors more than 1,000 points across all industrial units to control absolute and specific flows,
including performance indices. At each industrial unit, Raízen has its own laboratories capable of analyzing all
phases of the production process (from soil and water to products – sugar and ethanol), including all water flows,
from withdrawal to discharge. This allows for: guidelines for best agricultural practices; monitoring and ensuring
product quality and standards; and, guaranteeing remuneration for sucrose content. Raízen is a pioneer in the use
of a 100% automated laboratory for quality control of raw materials.
Raízen’s proprietary management of water treatment, in addition to water softening systems, demineralizers,
reuse and effluents, defines and monitors the chemical treatment of:
• More than 3,000m³/h of clarified water in the Water Treatment Plants (WTPs).
• More than 200,000m³/h of water reused in the cooling towers, and
• More than 6,000 tons of steam/h in boilers.
An outstanding project for conservation and reuse of sugarcane water in Raízen’s boilers is underway at the
Maracaí unit. The unit started to reuse sugarcane water from high pressure boilers as demineralized water
through steam condensate from the generators. This technique is common practice in low-pressure boilers, but
the application in high-pressure boilers is innovative. The project resulted in an additional 2.5 million kW for the
energy balance, enough to supply the homes in a city with a population of 4,300 for one year.
The impact of the ReduZa program is sizable: in two years, a reduction of more than 9 billion liters in water
withdrawal was achieved, equivalent to the annual consumption of a city with a population of 143,000. The energy
recovered by reusing hot water from the process totals 89 million kW, enough to supply the annual demand of
45,000 households, equivalent to 155,000 residents. The program yielded a cost reduction of R$14 million and
reduced specific consumption throughout Raízen [256]:
• Withdrawal / ton of sugarcane: from 0,97 to 0.78m3/ ton of sugarcane[257].

The Program also achieved a significant reduction in total inputs for the treatment of industrial water. In three
years, the use of these chemicals was reduced from 195 to 144 g/ton of sugarcane. In March 2017, Raízen received
the highest award, Governança da Água na Indústria (Governance of Water in the Industry), from the Federation
of Industries of the State of São Paulo (FIESP) for the ReduZa program [250]. The company has been sharing best
practices across its units and with other companies in the sector.
4.2.2.4 REVERSE LOGISTICS FOR AGROCHEMICAL PACKAGING
A federal law created in 2000 (Law No. 9,974, of June 6, 2000) defined strict rules for mandatory reverse logistics
for pesticides, with shared responsibilities between producers, resellers, and users. In 2001, agrochemical
companies created a non-profit organization to organize and implement the reverse logistics system: the Instituto
Nacional de Processamento de Embalagens Vazias (INPEV) (National Institute for the Processing of Empty
Packaging - INPEV) [259].
Figure 33 - Reverse logistics for agrochemical packaging

Source: INPEV [259].
Raízen contributes to the Sustainable Development Goals - SDG related to Circular Economy.
The full and efficient use of energy and other resources in sugarcane processes is a significant contribution to SDG
12 - Responsible Consumption and Production, particularly Target 12.2 “By 2030, achieve sustainable management
and efficient use of natural resources.”
The high level of circularity and innovation in Raízen’s production contributes to SDG 9 - Industry, Innovation and
Infrastructure, particularly Target 9.4 related to increased efficiency in the use of resources and greater adoption of
clean and environmentally adequate technologies and industrial processes.
5 TRANSPARENCY
Raízen’s motivation for preparing this work was to share with its stakeholders some important information
related to Brazil, the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector, and especially, its own operation.
Transparency is instrumental for Raízen, and the company discloses its ESG (Environment, Social, and Governance)
information through several platforms that can be accessed by customers and investors:
• Annual Report - GRI

• Carbon Disclosure Project - CDP
• Ecovadis
• ISE B3 (Corporate Sustainability Index)
• Dow Jones Sustainability Index
T R A N S PA R E N CY
6 REFERENCES
[1] O. Rosales-Calderon and V. Arantes, A review on commercial-scale high-value products that can be
produced alongside cellulosic ethanol, vol. 12, no. 1. BioMed Central, 2019.
[2] Raízen, “Relatório Anual 2019/2020,” 2020.
[3] Copacabana, “International Expansion Strategy.” 2020.
[4] IPCC, “Global warming of 1.5C,” 2018.
[5] WRI, “4 Charts Explain Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Countries and Sectors,” 2020. https://www.wri.org
blog/2020/02/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-country-sector (accessed Mar. 10, 2021).
[6] Brasil, “Brazil at COP22,” no. November, 2016, [Online]. Available: http://www.brazil.gov.br/about-brazil
news/2017/11/fact-sheet-cop22_en_nov16_final.pdf.
[7] Brasil, “Brazil’s Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC),” pp. 1–9, 2020, [Online]. Available: https:/
www.gov.br/mre/pt-br/canais_atendimento/imprensa/notas-a-imprensa/2020/apresentacao-da
contribuicao-nacionalmente-determinada-do-brasil-perante-o-acordo-de-paris.
[8] IEA, “World Energy Outlook 2020,” vol. 2050, no. October, pp. 1–461, 2020.
[9] Brazil, “Intended Nationally Determined Contribution,” Intend. Natl. Determ. Contrib. Towar. Achiev.
Object. UNITED NATIONS Framew. Conv. Clim. Chang. Purs., vol. 9, p. 6, 2015, doi: http://www4.unfccc.int
submissions/INDC/Published%20Documents/Brazil/1/BRAZIL%20iNDC%20english%20FINAL.pdf.
[10] Hannah Ritchie, “Sector by sector: where do global greenhouse gas emissions come from?,” Our World in
Data, 2020. https://ourworldindata.org/ghg-emissions-by-sector (accessed Mar. 04, 2021).
[11] WRI, “Global Historical Emissions,” 4 Charts Explain Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Countries and Sectors,
REFERENCES
2020. https://www.wri.org/blog/2020/02/greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-country-sector (accessed Mar. 04,

2021).
[12] N. B. Carvalho, D. Berrêdo Viana, M. S. Muylaert de Araújo, J. Lampreia, M. S. P. Gomes, and M. A. V.
Freitas, “How likely is Brazil to achieve its NDC commitments in the energy sector? A review on Brazilian
low-carbon energy perspectives,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 133, no. November 2019, 2020, doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2020.110343.
[13] SEEG, “SEEG 8 - Análise das emissões brasileiras de gases de efeito estufa e suas implicações para as
metas de clima do brasil 1970-2019,” 2020. http://plataforma.seeg.eco.br/total_emission# (accessed Mar.
11, 2021).
[14] INPE, “PRODES Amazônia - Monitoramento do Desmatamento da Floresta Amazônica Brasileira por
Satélite,” 2020. http://www.obt.inpe.br/OBT/assuntos/programas/amazonia/prodes.
[15] INPE, “Monitoramento do Desmatamento no Cerrado Brasileiro por Satélite,” 2020. http://cerrado.obt
inpe.br/.
[16] F. L. M. Freitas et al., “Who owns the Brazilian carbon?,” Glob. Chang. Biol., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 2129–2142,
May 2018, doi: 10.1111/gcb.14011.
[17] R. ILPF, “ILPF em números,” 2020. https://www.redeilpf.org.br/index.php/rede-ilpf/ilpf-em-numeros.
[18] EPE, “Balanço Energético Nacional 2020: Relatório síntese, ano base 2019,” Empres. Pesqui. Energética,
p. 73, 2020, [Online]. Available: https://www.epe.gov.br/pt/publicacoes-dados-abertos/publicacoes
balanco-energetico-nacional-2020.
[19] CONAB, “Acompanhamento da safra brasileira de cana-de-açúcar. V. 7 - Safra 2020/21, n.3 - Terceiro
levantamento, dezembro de 2020,” p. 62, 2020.
[20] B. A. Babcock, “Extensive and Intensive Agricultural Supply Response,” Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ., vol. 7,
no. 1, pp. 333–348, 2015, doi: 10.1146/annurev-resource-100913-012424.
[21] CONAB, “Acompanhamento da safra brasileira - Cana-de- açúcar,” SAFRA 2020/21 N.1 - Prim. Levant.
|MAIO 2020, vol. 7, 2020.
[22] UNICA, “UNICADATA,” 2020. unicadataobservatoriodacana.com.br.
[23] Governo do Estado de São Paulo, “Protocolo Agroambiental,” 2017. https://www
infraestruturameioambiente.sp.gov.br/etanolverde/.
[24] CETESB, “Companhia Ambiental do Estado de São Paulo,” 2019. https://cetesb.sp.gov.br/.
[25] Agrosatélite, “Agrosatélite,” 2019. https://agrosatelite.com.br/.
[26] INPE, “CANASAT,” 2019. http://www.dsr.inpe.br/laf/canasat/.
[27] UNICA, “Protocolo Agroambiental Etanol Mais Verde Primeiros Resultados - Safra 18/19.” 2020.
[28] UNICA, “Etanol evita 515 milhões de toneladas de CO2 na atmosfera.” Agrolink, 2020, [Online]. Available:
https://unica.com.br/noticias/uso-do-etanol-evita-515-milhoes-de-toneladas-de-co2-na-atmosfera/.
[29] UNICA, “A bioeletricidade da cana,” 2019, [Online]. Available: https://www.unica.com.br/wp-content
uploads/2019/07/UNICA-Bioeletricidade-julho2019-1.pdf.
[30] BONSUCRO, “Bonsucro Outcome Report - 2018,” vol. Version 1., 2019.
[31] BONSUCRO, “Bonsucro Outcome Report 2019,” pp. 1–54, 2020.
[32] Brasil, Lei no 13.576, Política Nacional de Biocombustíveis (RenovaBio) e dá outras providências. Brazil,
2017.
[33] EPA, “EPA lifecycle analysis of greenhouse gas emissions from renewable fuels.”2010.
[Online}. Availabre: - https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyNET.exe/P1006DVI.TXT?ZyActionD-ZyDocument&Client=
EPA&Index=2006+Thru+2010&Docs=&Query=&Time=&EndTime=&SearchMethod=1&TocRestrict=n&Toc=
&TocEntry=&QFieldYear=&QFieldMonth=&QFieldDay=&InQFieldOp=0&ExtQFieldOP=0&XmIQuery=.
[34] EPA, “Renewable Fuel Annual Standards,” Renewable Fuel Standard Program, 2020. https://www.epa.gov
renewable-fuel-standard-program/renewable-fuel-annual-standards.
[35] European Parliament, “Directive (EU) 2018/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the
promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources,” Off. J. Eur. Union, vol. 2018,no.
REFERENCES
L 328, pp. 82–209,2018, [Online]. Available: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT

PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018L2001&from=EN.
[36] IEA, “Biofuture Platform,” Website managed by DEN - Division for Energy Progress, Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, Brazil at the request of Biofuture Platform Member Countries and in collaboration with the
Biofuture Facilitator team at the International Energy Agency, 2021. http://www.biofutureplatform.org/
(accessed Apr. 08, 2021).
[37] Mission Innovation, “IC4: SUSTAINABLE BIOFUELS,” 2020. http://mission-innovation.net/our-work
innovation-challenges/sustainable-biofuels/ (accessed Mar. 17, 2021).
[38] M. Innovation, “Mission Innovation - Country Highlights,” 2020, [Online]. Available: http:/
mission-innovation.net/our-members/austria/highlights-in-2018/#:~:text=Climate and Energy Strategy
%23mission2030&text=By 2030%2C Austria will reduce,45-50%25 by 2030.
[39] L. G. Pereira, O. Cavalett, A. Bonomi, Y. Zhang, E. Warner, and H. L. Chum, “Comparison of biofuel life
cycle GHG emissions assessment tools: The case studies of ethanol produced from sugarcane, corn, and
wheat,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 110, no. October 2017, pp. 1–12, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j
rser.2019.04.043.
[40] ACV/KPMG, “Avaliação do ciclo de vida de produtos sucroenergéticos safra 19/20,” São Paulo, 2020.
[41] C. Hamelinck, M. Spöttle, L. Mark, and M. Staats, “2030 Transport decarbonisation
options,” p. 44, 2019, [Online]. Available: https://platformduurzamebiobrandstoffen.nl
wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019_Ecofys_Navigant_2030-Transport-decarbonisation-options.pdf.
[42] C. Manochio, B. R. Andrade, R. P. Rodriguez, and B. S. Moraes, “Ethanol from biomass: A comparative
overview,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 80, no. February, pp. 743–755, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j
rser.2017.05.063.
[43] A. Y. Milanez et al., “A Produção de etanol pela integração do milho-safrinha às usinas de cana-de
açúcar: avaliação ambiental, econômica e sugestões de política,” Rev. do BNDES, vol. 41, pp. 147–208, 2014.
[44] M. M. R. Moreira, J. E. A. Seabra, L. R. Lynd, S. M. Arantes, M. P. Cunha, and J. J. M. Guilhoto, “Socio
environmental and land-use impacts of double-cropped maize ethanol in Brazil,” Nat. Sustain., 2020, doi:
10.1038/s41893-019-0456-2.
[45] CARB, “LCFS Pathway Certified Carbon Intensities,” 2020. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/documents
lcfs-pathway-certified-carbon-intensities.
[46] M. D. B. Watanabe et al., “Hybrid Input-Output Life Cycle Assessment of First- and Second-Generation
Ethanol Production Technologies in Brazil,” J. Ind. Ecol., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 764–774, 2016, doi: 10.1111
jiec.12325.
[47] CONAB, “Serie Histórica,” 2021. https://www.conab.gov.br/info-agro/safras/serie-historica-das-safras
(accessed Feb. 25, 2021).
[48] EIA, “U.S. fuel ethanol production capacity increased by 3% in 2019,” 2020. https://www.eia.gov
todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45316#:~:text=U.S. production of fuel ethanol,production has declined more
recently. (accessed Apr. 08, 2021).
[49] ePURE, “ePURE, European renewable ethanol – key figures 2017,” pp. 1–2, 2019, [Online]. Available: http:/
epure.org/media/1466/epure-key-figures-2015.pdf.
[50] ANP, “RenovaBio,” 2019. , [Online]. Available: http://www.anp.gov.br/producao-de-biocombustiveis
renovabio.
[51] M. Wang, J. Han, J. B. Dunn, H. Cai, and A. Elgowainy, “Well-to-wheels energy use and greenhouse gas
emissions of ethanol from corn, sugarcane and cellulosic biomass for US use,” Environ. Res. Lett., vol. 7,
no. 4, 2012, doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/7/4/045905.
[52] M. M. R. Moreira, “Estratégias para expansão do setor sucroenergético e suas contribuições para a NDC
Brasileira,” p. 134, 2016.
[53] CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES AND MANAGEMENT - CGEE, Second-generation sugarcane bioenergy
REFERENCES
& biochemicals. Brasília, 2017.

[54] M. de F. Andrade et al., “Air quality in the megacity of São Paulo: Evolution over the last 30 years and future
perspectives,” Atmos. Environ., vol. 159, no. March, pp. 66–82, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2017.03.051.
[55] Renewable Fuels Association, “Environment. Ethanol, the Low Carbon Solution,” 2020. https://ethanolrfa
org/environment/.
[56] J. Yang et al., “Emissions from a flex fuel GDI vehicle operating on ethanol fuels show marked contrasts in
chemical, physical and toxicological characteristics as a function of ethanol content,” Sci. Total Environ.,
vol. 683, pp. 749–761, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.279.
[57] E. M. P. A. Vormittag, C. G. Rodrigues, P. A. de André, and P. H. N. Saldiva, “Assessment and valuation of
public health impacts from gradual biodiesel implementation in the transport energy matrix in Brazil,”
Aerosol Air Qual. Res., vol. 18, no. 9, pp. 2375–2382, 2018, doi: 10.4209/aaqr.2017.11.0449.
[58] S. Mueller and O. H. Sciences, “Health Impact of Blending Ethanol into Gasoline in 5 Global Cities,” pp.
1–2, 2019.
[59] X. Liang et al., “Air quality and health impacts from using ethanol blended gasoline fuels in China,” Atmos.
Environ., vol. 228, no. March, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.atmosenv.2020.117396.
[60] D. Jin, K. Choi, C. L. Myung, Y. Lim, J. Lee, and S. Park, “The impact of various ethanol-gasoline blends
on particulates and unregulated gaseous emissions characteristics from a spark ignition direct injection
(SIDI) passenger vehicle,” Fuel, vol. 209, no. January, pp. 702–712, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.fuel.2017.08.063.
[61] K. Von Stackelberg, J. Buonocore, P. V. Bhave, and J. A. Schwartz, “Public health impacts of secondary
particulate formation from aromatic hydrocarbons in gasoline,” Environ. Heal. A Glob. Access Sci. Source,
vol. 12, no. 1, 2013, doi: 10.1186/1476-069X-12-19.
[62] M. Muñoz et al., “Bioethanol Blending Reduces Nanoparticle, PAH, and Alkyl- and Nitro-PAH Emissions
and the Genotoxic Potential of Exhaust from a Gasoline Direct Injection Flex-Fuel Vehicle,” Environ. Sci.
Technol., vol. 50, no. 21, pp. 11853–11861, 2016, doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b02606.
[63] J. E. Tibaquirá, J. I. Huertas, S. Ospina, L. F. Quirama, and J. E. Niño, “The Effect of Using Ethanol-Gasoline
Blends on the Mechanical, Energy and Environmental Performance of In-Use Vehicles,” Energies, vol. 11,
no. 1, pp. 1–17, 2018, doi: 10.3390/en11010221.
[64] M. T. Pacheco, M. M. M. Parmigiani, M. de Fatima Andrade, L. Morawska, and P. Kumar, “A review of
emissions and concentrations of particulate matter in the three major metropolitan areas of Brazil,” J.
Transp. Heal., vol. 4, no. January, pp. 53–72, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jth.2017.01.008.
[65] N. J. Castro, R. Brandão, and G. de A. Dantas, “A bioeletricidade sucroenergética na matriz elétrica,”
Etanol e Bioeletricidade, vol. 1, pp. 140–153, 2010.
[66] F. Salvo, A.; Artaxo, P.; Geiger, “Reduced ultrafine particle levels in São Paulo´s atmosphere during shifts
from gasoline to ethanol use.”
[67] P. Afonso, “Ethanol and Air Pollutants,” Sustain. Mobil. Ethanol Talks, 2020.
[68] S. Mueller, “Avoided Mortalities from the Substitution of Ethanol for Aromatics in Gasoline with a Focus
on Secondary Particulate Formation Steffen Mueller , PhD Principal Economist , University of Illinois at
Chicago Energy Resources Center,” vol. 12, no. 2013, pp. 1–7, 2019.
[69] RFA, “Life cycle air quality impacts of conventional and alternative light-duty transportation in the United
States,” pp. 10–12, 2014, [Online]. Available: https://ethanolrfa.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09
Response-to-UM-study.pdf.
[70] N. J. Castro, R. Brandão, and G. de A. Dantas, “Etanol e bioeletricidade: a cana-de-açúcar no futuro da
matriz elétrica,” Etanol e Bioeletricidade, vol. 1, pp. 140–153, 2010.
[71] Reuters, “Etanol e biodiesel evitam centenas de mortes ao ano em SP por menos emissões, aponta EPE,”
2021. https://www.novacana.com/n/etanol/meio-ambiente/etanol-biodiesel-evitam-centenas-mortes-ao
ano-sp-menos-emissoes-epe-010321? (accessed Mar. 02, 2021).
[72] I. C. M. and Joaquim E. A. Seabra and M. R. L. V. Leal, “Greenhouse Gases Emissions Related To
REFERENCES
Sugarcane Ethanol,” Sugarcane bioethanol — R&D Product. Sustain., pp. 291–300, 2014, doi: 10.5151
blucheroa-sugarcane-sugarcanebioethanol_29.
[73] V. Daioglou et al., “Bioenergy technologies in long-run climate change mitigation: results from the EMF-33
study,” Clim. Change, vol. 163, no. 3, pp. 1603–1620, 2020, doi: 10.1007/s10584-020-02799-y.
[74] Hannah Ritchie, “How much will it cost to mitigate climate change?,” Our World in Data, 2017. https:/
ourworldindata.org/how-much-will-it-cost-to-mitigate-climate-change (accessed Mar. 15, 2021).
[75] T. L. Junqueira et al., “Techno-economic analysis and climate change impacts of sugarcane biorefineries
considering different time horizons,” Biotechnol. Biofuels, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2017, doi: 10.1186
s13068-017-0722-3.
[76] A. Strapasson, J. Woods, H. Chum, N. Kalas, N. Shah, and F. Rosillo-Calle, “On the global limits of
bioenergy and land use for climate change mitigation,” GCB Bioenergy, vol. 9, no. 12, pp. 1721–1735, 2017,
doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12456.
[77] IRENA, Global Renewables Outlook: Energy transformation 2050. 2020.
[78] EPE, “Plano Nacional de Energia 2050,” pp. 1–232, 2020, [Online]. Available: https://tinyurl.com/yaw7e5aa.
[79] N. F. Galatoulas, K. N. Genikomsakis, and C. S. Ioakimidis, “Spatio-temporal trends of e-bike sharing
system deployment: A review in Europe, North America and Asia,” Sustain., vol. 12, no. 11, 2020, doi:
10.3390/su12114611.
[80] S. Bellocchi, K. Klöckner, M. Manno, M. Noussan, and M. Vellini, “On the role of electric vehicles towards
low-carbon energy systems: Italy and Germany in comparison,” Appl. Energy, vol. 255, no. May, p. 113848,
2019, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113848.
[81] G. G. Dranka and P. Ferreira, “Electric vehicles and biofuels synergies in the brazilian energy system,”
Energies, vol. 13, no. 17, 2020, doi: 10.3390/en13174423.
[82] D. Wu et al., “Regional Heterogeneity in the Emissions Benefits of Electrified and Lightweighted Light-Duty
Vehicles,” Environ. Sci. Technol., vol. 53, no. 18, pp. 10560–10570, 2019, doi: 10.1021/acs.est.9b00648.
[83] CNPEM, “A eletrificação de veículos e o futuro do etanol combustível no Brasil,” 2018.
[84] G. Pereira, “O carro bioelétrico.” 2020.
[85] L. L. P. de Souza, E. E. S. Lora, J. C. E. Palacio, M. H. Rocha, M. L. G. Renó, and O. J. Venturini,
“Comparative environmental life cycle assessment of conventional vehicles with different fuel options,
plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles for a sustainable transportation system in Brazil,” J. Clean. Prod., vol.
203, pp. 444–468, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.08.236.
[86] L. Yang, B. Yu, B. Yang, H. Chen, G. Malima, and Y. M. Wei, “Life cycle environmental assessment of
electric and internal combustion engine vehicles in China,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 285, no. xxxx, p. 124899,
2021, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124899.
[87] P. Wolfram, Q. Tu, N. Heeren, S. Pauliuk, and E. G. Hertwich, “Material efficiency and climate change
mitigation of passenger vehicles,” J. Ind. Ecol., pp. 1–17, 2020, doi: 10.1111/jiec.13067.
[88] T. R. Hawkins, B. Singh, G. Majeau-Bettez, and A. H. Strømman, “Comparative Environmental Life Cycle
Assessment of Conventional and Electric Vehicles,” J. Ind. Ecol., vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 53–64, 2013, doi:
10.1111/j.1530-9290.2012.00532.x.
[89] M. Messagie, F. S. Boureima, T. Coosemans, C. Macharis, and J. Van Mierlo, “A range-based vehicle life
cycle assessment incorporating variability in the environmental assessment of different vehicle
technologies and fuels,” Energies, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 1467–1482, 2014, doi: 10.3390/en7031467.
[90] E. F. Choma and C. M. L. Ugaya, “Environmental impact assessment of increasing electric vehicles in the
Brazilian fleet,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 152, pp. 497–507, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.07.091.
[91] I. Dolganova, A. Rödl, V. Bach, M. Kaltschmitt, and M. Finkbeiner, “A review of life cycle assessment
studies of electric vehicles with a focus on resource use,” Resources, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 4–8, 2020, doi:
10.3390/resources9030032.
[92] R. Faria, P. Marques, P. Moura, F. Freire, J. Delgado, and A. T. De Almeida, “Impact of the electricity mix
and use profile in the life-cycle assessment of electric vehicles,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 24, pp.
271–287, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.063.
REFERENCES
[93] S. Xiong, Y. Wang, B. Bai, and X. Ma, “A hybrid life cycle assessment of the large-scale application of
electric vehicles,” Energy, vol. 216, p. 119314, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.energy.2020.119314.
[94] H. C. Kim, T. J. Wallington, R. Arsenault, C. Bae, S. Ahn, and J. Lee, “Cradle-to-Gate Emissions from a
Commercial Electric Vehicle Li-Ion Battery: A Comparative Analysis,” Environ. Sci. Technol., vol. 50, no. 14,
pp. 7715–7722, 2016, doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b00830.
[95] H. Hao, Z. Mu, S. Jiang, Z. Liu, and F. Zhao, “GHG Emissions from the production of lithium-ion batteries
for electric vehicles in China,” Sustain., vol. 9, no. 4, 2017, doi: 10.3390/su9040504.
[96] C. Tagliaferri et al., “Life cycle assessment of future electric and hybrid vehicles: A cradle-to
grave systems engineering approach,” Chem. Eng. Res. Des., vol. 112, pp. 298–309, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j
cherd.2016.07.003.
[97] L. A. W. Ellingsen, “The size and range effect: Life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of electric vehicles,”
CONCAWE Rev., vol. 2017, p. 6, 2017.
[98] H. Ambrose, A. Kendall, M. Lozano, S. Wachche, and L. Fulton, “Trends in life cycle greenhouse gas
emissions of future light duty electric vehicles,” Transp. Res. Part D Transp. Environ., vol. 81, no. August
2019, p. 102287, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.trd.2020.102287.
[99] F. Del Pero, M. Delogu, and M. Pierini, “Life Cycle Assessment in the automotive sector: A comparative
case study of Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) and electric car,” Procedia Struct. Integr., vol. 12, pp.
521–537, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.prostr.2018.11.066.
[100] Marshall Miller, “The Development of Lifecycle Data for Hydrogen Fuel Production and Delivery Contract
No . 14-318 Prepared for the California Air Resources Board and the California Environmental Protection
Agency Marshall Miller , Principal Investigator Institute of Trans,” no. 14, 2017.
[101] D. Hall and N. Lutsey, “Effects of battery manufacturing on electric vehicle life-cycle greenhouse gas
emissions,” ICCT Brief., no. February, p. 12, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://www.theicct.org/sites/default
files/publications/EV-life-cycle-GHG_ICCT-Briefing_09022018_vF.pdf.
[102] G. Wernet, C. Bauer, B. Steubing, J. Reinhard, E. Moreno-Ruiz, and B. Weidema, “The ecoinvent database
version 3 (part I): overview and methodology,” Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., vol. 21, no. 9, pp. 1218–1230, 2016,
doi: 10.1007/s11367-016-1087-8.
[103] F. Knobloch et al., “Net emission reductions from electric cars and heat pumps in 59 world regions over
time,” Nat. Sustain., vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 437–447, 2020, doi: 10.1038/s41893-020-0488-7.
[104] IPEA, “Política energética no BRICS: desafios da transição energética,” 2019, [Online]. Available: http:/
repositorio.ipea.gov.br/bitstream/11058/9347/1/TD_2495.pdf.
[105] Hannah E. Murdock Duncan Gibb Thomas André, Renewables 2019 Global Status Report, vol. 8, no. 3.
2019.
[106] K. Aguirre et al., “Life cycle Analysis Comparison of a Battery Electric Vehicle and a Conventional Gasoline
Vehicle,” PhD Thesis, no. June, pp. 1–33, 2012.
[107] W. Shen, W. Han, T. J. Wallington, and S. L. Winkler, “China Electricity Generation Greenhouse Gas
Emission Intensity in 2030: Implications for Electric Vehicles,” Environ. Sci. Technol., vol. 53, no. 10, pp.
6063–6072, 2019, doi: 10.1021/acs.est.8b05264.
[108] Z. Wu, C. Wang, P. Wolfram, Y. Zhang, X. Sun, and E. Hertwich, “Assessing electric vehicle policy
with region-specific carbon footprints,” Appl. Energy, vol. 256, no. 7491, p. 113923, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j
apenergy.2019.113923.
[109] D. B. Gohil, A. Pesyridis, and J. R. Serrano, “Overview of clean automotive thermal propulsion options for
India to 2030,” Appl. Sci., vol. 10, no. 10, 2020, doi: 10.3390/app10103604.
[110] D. S. Swidler, “ScholarlyCommons Life Cycle Assessment of Hydrogen as a Transportation Fuel in the
California Market,” 2020.
[111] M. F. Neves and R. B. Kalaki, Bioenergy from sugarcane. 2020.
[112] S. C. Trindade, L. A. H. Nogueira, and G. M. Souza, “Relevance of LACAf biofuels for global sustainability,”
Biofuels, vol. 0, no. 0, pp. 1–11, 2019, doi: 10.1080/17597269.2019.1679566.
[113] L. Jim, “Biofuels Mandates Around the World 2018,” Biofuels Dig., pp. 1–49, 2018, [Online]. Available:
https://www.biofuelsdigest.com/bdigest/2018/01/01/biofuels-mandates-around-the-world-2018/.
[114] ANP, Política Nacional de Biocombustíveis (RenovaBio) e dá outras providências. Brasil, 2017.
REFERENCES
[115] M. C. B. Grassi and G. A. G. Pereira, “Energy-cane and RenovaBio: Brazilian vectors to boost the
development of Biofuels,” Ind. Crops Prod., vol. 129, no. December 2018, pp. 201–205, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j
indcrop.2018.12.006.
[116] S. Solomon, “Sugarcane Agriculture and Sugar Industry in India: At a Glance,” Sugar Tech, vol. 16, no. 2,
pp. 113–124, 2014, doi: 10.1007/s12355-014-0303-8.
[117] S. Solomon, “Sugarcane Production and Development of Sugar Industry in India,” Sugar Tech, vol. 18, no.
6, pp. 588–602, 2016, doi: 10.1007/s12355-016-0494-2.
[118] A. Chandra and M. Rosmann, “Biofuels Annual India 2020, GAIN Report Number: IN2020-0122, United
States Department of Agriculture,” pp. 1–26, 2020.
[119] G. Kim, “China - Peoples Republic of Biofuels Annual,” Glob. Agric. Inf. Netw., pp. 1–25, 2019, [Online].
Available: https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/report/downloadreportbyfilename?filename=Biofuels
Annual_Beijing_China - Peoples Republic of_8-9-2019.pdf.
[120] USDA, “Biofuels Annual - Japan,” no. June, pp. 1–25, 2020.
[121] RED, “Directive 2009/28/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2009 on
the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources and amending and subsequently
repealing Directives 2001/77/EC and 2003/30/EC.,” Off. J. Eur. Union, vol. 140, no. 16, pp. 16–62, 2009, doi:
10.3000/17252555.L_2009.140.eng.
[122] B. Flach, S. Lieberz, and S. Bolla, “GAIN Report - EU Biofuels Annual 2019,” p. 52, 2019, [Online]. Available:
https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/report/downloadreportbyfilename?filename=Biofuels Annual
The Hague_EU-28_7-15-2019.pdf.
[123] C. S. Ramos, “Reino Unido amplia para 10% mistura permitida de etnaol à gasolina,” Valor Econômico,
2021. https://valor.globo.com/agronegocios/noticia/2021/02/25/reino-unido-amplia-para-10percent
mistura-permitida-de-etanol-a-gasolina.ghtml (accessed Mar. 04, 2021).
[124] U. Europeia, “Pacto Ecológico Europeu,” 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/priorities-2019-2024
european-green-deal_pt (accessed Mar. 05, 2021).
[125] Valor Econômico, “Reino Unido amplia para 10% mistura permitida de etanol à gasolina,” 2021. https://
valor.globo.com/agronegocios/noticia/2021/02/25/reino-unido-amplia-para-10percent-mistura-permitida-de-
etanol-a-gasolina.ghtml (accessed Mar. 22, 2021).
[126] UDOP, “Reino Unido segue exemplo brasileiro ao adotar combustível renovável,” 2021. https://www
udop.com.br/noticia/2021/03/01/reino-unido-segue-exemplo-brasileiro-ao-adotar-combustivel-renovavel
html (accessed Mar. 22, 2021).
[127] CARB - California Air Resources Board, “Low Carbon Fuel Standard,” 2020. https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our
work/programs/low-carbon-fuel-standard (accessed Mar. 05, 2021).
[128] Reuters, “Trump’s agriculture department announces 30% biofuel goal for 2050,” ENVIRONMENT, 2020.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ethanol-idUSKBN20E1F3 (accessed Mar. 04, 2021).
[129] OCDE, “Global mitigation potential of biofuels in the transport sector,” 2018. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org
sites/dce06785-en/index.html?itemId=/content/component/dce06785-en (accessed Mar. 04, 2021).
[130] S. P. Souza, L. A. H. Nogueira, H. K. Watson, L. R. Lynd, M. Elmissiry, and L. A. B. Cortez, “Potential of
sugarcane in modern energy development in Southern Africa,” Front. Energy Res., vol. 4, no. DEC, pp.
1–11, 2016, doi: 10.3389/fenrg.2016.00039.
[131] Index Mundi, “Sudan Fuel Ethanol Production by Year,” 2021. https://www.indexmundi.com
energy/?country=sd&product=ethanol&graph=production (accessed Apr. 04, 2021).
[132] F. Hartley, D. van Seventer, E. Tostão, and C. Arndt, “Economic impacts of developing a biofuel industry in
Mozambique,” Dev. South. Afr., vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 233–249, 2019, doi: 10.1080/0376835X.2018.1548962.
[133] S. N. and Y. I. Jeffrey Skeer, Biofuel potential in Sub-Saharan Africa: Raising food yields, reducing food
waste and utilising residues. 2017.
[134] M. Brinkman et al., “The distribution of food security impacts of biofuels, a Ghana case study,” Biomass
and Bioenergy, vol. 141, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2020.105695.
[135] A. Ahmed, “Is the global climate target feasible in Africa using bioenergy pathway? Evidence from a local
perspective in Ghana,” Sci. African, vol. 9, p. e00544, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.sciaf.2020.e00544.
[136] S. M. Maishanu, A. S. Sambo, and M. M. Garba, Sustainable bioenergy development in africa: Issues,
REFERENCES
challenges, and the way forward. Elsevier Inc., 2019.

[137] ICAO, “Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA),” 2020. https://www
icao.int/environmental-protection/CORSIA/Pages/default.aspx.
[138] IRENA, Hydrogen: A Renewable Energy Perspective, no. September. Abu Dhabi, 2019.
[139] J. Tomei and R. Helliwell, “Food versus fuel? Going beyond biofuels,” Land use policy, vol. 56, no. August
2016, pp. 320–326, 2016, doi: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2015.11.015.
[140] International Renewable Energy Agency(2017), International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA),
“Renewable Energy Statistics 2017,” Tech. Rep., ISBN: 978-92-9260-0334, Jul. 2017. Available: http://www
irena.org/publica tions/2017/Jul/Renewable-Energy-Statistics-2017. Last retrieved on March 21, 2018.
2017.
[141] C. Biofuels, “Recensione: OECD-FAO Agricultural Outlook 2008-2017,” Econ. Dirit. Agroaliment., pp.
191–206, 2018, doi: /10.1787/agr-outl-data-en.
[142] IEA, “Energy Technology Perspectives,” Paris, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.iea.org/reports
energy-technology-perspectives-2017.
[143] D. S. Shrestha, B. D. Staab, and J. A. Duffield, “Biofuel impact on food prices index and land use change,”
Biomass and Bioenergy, vol. 124, no. August 2018, pp. 43–53, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2019.03.003.
[144] K. L. Kline et al., “Reconciling food security and bioenergy: priorities for action,” GCB Bioenergy, vol. 9, no.
3, pp. 557–576, 2017, doi: 10.1111/gcbb.12366.
[145] A. Allee, “Cross-national analysis of food security drivers : comparing results based on the Food Insecurity
Experience Scale and Global Food Security Index,” Springer, 2021.
[146] G. M. Souza, R. L. Victoria, C. A. Joly, and L. M. Verdade, Bioenergy & Sustainability: bridging the gaps,
Scope; FAP. São Paulo, 2015.
[147] JornalCana, “Setor sucroenergético representa 2% do PIB brasileiro, afirma diretor do ITC,” 2019. https:/
jornalcana.com.br/setor-sucroenergetico-representa-2-do-pib-brasileiro-afirma-diretor-do-itc/
(accessed Mar. 16, 2021).
[148] CEPEA, “Especial temático mercado de trabalho do agronegócio: a dinâmica dos empregos formais na
agroindústria sucroenergética de 2000 a 2016,” Cent. Estud. avançados em Econ. Apl., 2018.
[149] UNICA, “Setor sucroenergético,” 2020. https://unica.com.br/setor-sucroenergetico/ (accessed Mar. 16,
2021).
[150] M. R. L. V. Leal and T. A. D. Hernandes, “SUCRE Sugarcane Renewable Electricity,” Proj. Bra/10/G31, p.
158, 2020.
[151] L. R. Lynd et al., “Cellulosic ethanol: status and innovation,” Curr. Opin. Biotechnol., vol. 45, pp. 202–211,
2017, doi: 10.1016/j.copbio.2017.03.008.
[152] ACV Brasil, “Avaliação do Ciclo de vida de produtos sucroenergéticos safra 18/19,” vol. versão 3, pp. 1–106,
2020.
[153] EPA, “Renewable Fuel Standard Program: Standards for 2020 and Biomass- Based Diesel Volume for 2021
and Other Changes,” Regul. Impact Anal., vol. 85, no. 25, p. 1109, 2020, [Online]. Available: http://www3
epa.gov/otaq/renewablefuels/420r10006.pdf.
[154] S. Ugarte and U. Fritsche, “Towards advanced biofuels,” no. February, 2016.
[155] L. G. Pereira, O. Cavalett, A. Bonomi, Y. Zhang, E. Warner, and H. L. Chum, “Comparison of biofuel life
cycle GHG emissions assessment tools: The case studies of ethanol produced from sugarcane, corn, and
wheat,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 110, no. April, pp. 1–12, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2019.04.043.
[156] Programa Brasileiro GHG Protocol, “Ferramenta GHG Protocol v2019.3.” 2021, [Online]. Available: https:/
eaesp.fgv.br/centros/centro-estudos-sustentabilidade/projetos/programa-brasileiro-ghg-protocol.
[157] EPE, “Statistical Yearbook of electricity: 2019 baseline year,” p. 256, 2020, [Online]. Available: http://www
epe.gov.br.
[158] M. E. Leirpoll, J. S. Næss, O. Cavalett, M. Dorber, X. Hu, and F. Cherubini, “Optimal combination of
bioenergy and solar photovoltaic for renewable energy production on abandoned cropland,” Renew.
REFERENCES
Energy, vol. 168, pp. 45–56, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.renene.2020.11.159.

[159] UNEP, “Megadiverse Brazil: giving biodiversity an online boost. UN Environment Programme,”
ECOSYSTEMS AND BIODIVERSITY, 2019. https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/megadiverse
brazil-giving-biodiversity-online-boost (accessed Jun. 17, 2020).
[160] IBGE, “Países,” Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, 2020. https://paises.ibge.gov.br/#/ (accessed
Jun. 17, 2020).
[161] E. Union, “The EU in brief,” 2020. https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en.
[162] F. Chaddad, The economics and organization of Brazilian agriculture: recent evolution and productivity
gains, 1st ed. Academic Press, 2015.
[163] M. Moreira, M. M.R.; Arantes, S. M; Romeiro, “RED II information paper: assessment of iLUC risk for
sugarcane and soybean biofuels feedstock,” São Paulo, 2018.
[164] MAPBIOMAS Brasil, “Estatísticas.” https://mapbiomas.org/estatisticas?cama_set_language=pt-BR
(accessed Jun. 24, 2020).
[165] IBGE, “Produção Agrícola Municipal - PAM,” 2020. https://www.ibge.gov.br/estatisticas/economicas
agri%ADcultura-e-pecuaria/9117-producao-agricola-municipal-culturas-temporarias-e-permanentes
html?=&t=o-que-e (accessed Jun. 24, 2020).
[166] EPE, “Balanço Energético Nacional,” Empresa de Pesquisa Energética, 2020. .
[167] United States Department of Agriculture, “Sugar : World Markets and Trade Global 2020 / 21 Sugar
Production is Estimated Higher,” 2020.
[168] UNICA, “Geração de bioeletricidade em geral para a rede, por estado, anual,” 2021, [Online]. Available:
https://observatoriodacana.com.br/listagem.php?idMn=129.
[169] J. Chiavari and C. L. Lopes, “Forest and Land Use Policies on Private Lands: an International Comparison,”
INPUT Iniciat. para o Uso da Terra, pp. 1–36, 2017, [Online]. Available: https://climatepolicyinitiative
org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Full_Report_Forest_and_Land_Use_Policies_on_Private_Lands_-_an
International_Comparison-1.pdf.
[170] Brasil, Lei de Proteção à Vegetação Nativa. Brasil, 2012.
[171] FUNAI, “Demarcação de Terras Indígenas,” Fundação Nacional do Índio, 2020. http://www.funai.gov.br
index.php/todosdtp/154-demarcacao-de-terras-indi¬genas (accessed Jun. 23, 2020).
[172] Brasil, Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza. Brasil, 2000.
[173] Brasil, Lei da Mata Atlântica. Brasil, 2006.
[174] IBGE, “Cartas e Mapas,” 2020. https://www.ibge.gov.br/geociencias/cartas-e-mapas.html (accessed Jun.
24, 2020).
[175] Brasil, Cadastro Ambiental Rural (CAR). Brasil, 2019, pp. 5–10.
[176] Ana Paula Moreira da Silva; Henrique Rodrigues Marques; Regina Helena Rosa Sambuichi, Mudanças no
código florestal brasileiro: desafios para a implementação da nova lei. Rio de janeiro: IPEA, 2016.
[177] A. Elobeid, M. M. R. Moreira, C. Zanetti de Lima, M. Carriquiry, and L. Harfuch, “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.
[178] Serviço Florestal Brasileiro, “Números do Cadastro Ambiental Rural,” 2020. http://www.florestal.gov.br
numeros-do-car (accessed Apr. 16, 2020).
[179] J. G. da Silva, C. F. Ruviaro, and J. B. de S. Ferreira Filho, “Livestock intensification as a climate
policy: Lessons from the Brazilian case,” Land use policy, vol. 62, pp. 232–245, 2017, doi: 10.1016/j
landusepol.2016.12.025.
[180] GTPS, “Brazilian livestock overview and its contribution to the sustainable development,” 2017, [Online].
Available: https://www.inputbrasil.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/GTPS_BRAZILIAN-LIVESTOCK
OVERVIEW_v3.pdf.
[181] D. Nepstad et al., “Slowing Amazon deforestation through public policy and interventions in beef and soy
supply chains,” Science (80-. )., vol. 344, no. 6188, pp. 1118–1123, 2014, [Online]. Available: http://www
sciencemag.org.libaccess.sjlibrary.org/content/344/6188/1118.full.pdf.
[182] UFG/LAPIG, “Atlas Digital das Pastagens Brasileiras,” Access our Atlas. https://pastagem.org.
[183] C. Gandour and R. Rocha, “DETERring Deforestation in the Amazon: Environmental Monitoring and Law
REFERENCES
Enforcement,” Clim. Policy Initiat., vol. 55, no. 21, p. 48, 2013, [Online]. Available: https://
climatepolicyinitiative.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/DETERring-Deforestation-in-the-Brazilian-
Amazon-Environmental-Monitoring-and-Law-Enforcement-Technical-Paper_Feb2017.pdf.
[184] M. Adami, B. F. T. Rudorff, R. M. Freitas, D. A. Aguiar, L. M. Sugawara, and M. P. Mello, “Remote sensing
time series to evaluate direct land use change of recent expanded sugarcane crop in Brazil,” Sustainability,
vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 574–585, 2012, doi: 10.3390/su4040574.
[185] M. Follador, G. Philippidis, J. Davis, and B. Soares-Filho, Assessing the impacts of the EU bioeconomy on
third countries - Potential environmental impacts in Brazil of UE biofuel demand to 2030. 2019.
[186] M. S. Jank and S. H. G. De Miranda, China-Brazil partnership on agriculture and food security. 2020.
[187] ANP, “Geração de lastro, aposentadoria e informações sobre negociações de CBIO na B3,” 2020. https://
www.gov.br/anp/pt-br/assuntos/producao-e-fornecimento-de-biocombustiveis/renovabio/geracao-lastro-
emissao-cbio-informacoes-negociacoes-cbios-b3.
[188] B3, “Renda fixa - Dados por ativo,” CBIO - Crédito de descarbonização, 2021. http://www.b3.com.br/pt_br/
market-data-e-indices/servicos-de-dados/market-data/historico/renda-fixa/ (accessed Mar. 02, 2021).
[189] M. R. L. V. Leal, L. A. Horta Nogueira, and L. A. B. Cortez, “Land demand for ethanol production,” Appl.
Energy, vol. 102, pp. 266–271, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2012.09.037.
[190] L. A. Horta Nogueira, J. R. Moreira, U. Schuchardt, and J. Goldemberg, “The rationality of biofuels,” Energy
Policy, vol. 61, pp. 595–598, 2013, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2013.05.112.
[191] IRENA, Sugarcane bioenergy in southern Africa: Economic potential for sustainable scale-up, no. May
2019. 2019.
[192] Center for Strategic Studies and Management - CGEE, “Second-generation sugarcane bioenergy &
biochemicals,” Brasília, 2017.
[193] R. de O. Bordonal, J. L. N. Carvalho, R. Lal, E. B. de Figueiredo, B. G. de Oliveira, and N. La Scala,
“Sustainability of sugarcane production in Brazil. A review,” Agron. Sustain. Dev., vol. 38, no. 2, 2018, doi:
10.1007/s13593-018-0490-x.
[194] L. A. Monteiro and P. C. Sentelhas, “Sugarcane yield gap: Can it be determined at national level with a
simple agrometeorological model?,” Crop Pasture Sci., vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 272–284, 2017, doi: 10.1071/
CP16334.
[200] I. P. Lisboa et al., “Sugarcane straw removal effects on plant growth and stalk yield,” Ind. Crops Prod., vol.
111, no. July 2017, pp. 794–806, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.indcrop.2017.11.049.
[201] M. Carvalho and F. Duarte, “Agronomic and environmental implications of sugarcane straw removal: a
major review.” 2017.
[202] D. F. dos Santos e Silva, J. V. Bomtempo, and F. C. Alves, “Innovation opportunities in the Brazilian sugar-
energy sector,” J. Clean. Prod., vol. 218, pp. 871–879, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.02.062.
[203] RSB & Agroicone, “Feedstock availability for sustainable aviation fuels in Brazil,” 2021.
[204] B. K. and J. C. Newton P, Civita N, Frankel-Goldwater L, “What Is Regenerative Agriculture? A Review of
Scholar and Practitioner Deﬁnitions Based on Processes and Outcomes.,” Front. Sustain. Food Syst., vol.
Vol. 4, 2020.
[205] G. Soloviev, Ethan Roland & Landua, “Levels of regenerative agriculture.,” Terra Genes. Int., 2016, [Online].
Available: http://www.terra-genesis.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Levels-of-Regenerative-
Agriculture-1.pdf.
[206] European Commission, “Carbon Farming Schemes in Europe - Roundtable,” pp. 1–23, 2019, [Online].
Available: https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/files/presentation/2019/cf_roundtable_background_04102019_
final.pdf.
[207] Organic Regenerative Certified, “Farm like the world depends on it,” 2021. https://regenorganic.org/
(accessed Mar. 28, 2021).
[208] Savory, “What is holistic management?,” Managing the complexities of land & livestock, 2021. https://
savory.global/holistic-management/ (accessed Apr. 01, 2021).
[209] Raízen, “Manual de boas práticas para produção sustentável de cana-de-açúcar,” vol. 1a edição, 2017.
[210] M. Carlini and V. Laurens, “O Big Push sustentável na cadeia produtiva de cana-de-açúcar,” 2020.
[211] Raízen, “Raízen cellulosic ethanol pathway Integrated 1G/2G,” 2019.
REFERENCES
[212] Raízen, “Raízen e Geo Energética anunciam joint venture para construção de planta de biogás,” 2018.
https://www.raizen.com.br/sala-de-imprensa/raizen-e-geo-energetica-anunciam-joint-venture-para-
construcao-de-planta-de-biogas (accessed Apr. 06, 2021).
[213] Raízen, “Raízen inaugura planta de biogás e consolida portfólio de energias renováveis,” 2020. https://
www.raizen.com.br/sala-de-imprensa/raizen-inaugura-planta-de-biogas-e-consolida-portfolio-de-
energias-renovaveis (accessed Apr. 06, 2021).
[214] NovaCana, “Pellets de bagaço de cana da Raízen são exportados para o Reino Unido,” 2021. https://
www.novacana.com/n/etanol/mercado/exportacao/pellets-bagaco-cana-raizen-exportados-reino-
unido-130121 (accessed Apr. 04, 2021).
[215] International Labour Organization, “Ratifications for Brazil,” 2020. https://www.ilo.org/dyn/normlex/en/f?p
=NORMLEXPUB:11200:0::NO::P11200_COUNTRY_ID:102571 (accessed Jun. 14, 2020).
[216] H. R. Council, “General Assembly,” United Nations, vol. 19, no. 4, p. 21, 2010, doi: 10.1017/
S0020818300012686.
[217] Gulnara Shahinian, “Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery, including its causes and
consequences,” 2020. https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/slavery/srslavery/pages/srslaveryindex.aspx
(accessed Jun. 15, 2020).
[218] Brasil, “Decreto no 4.552/2002, de 27 de dezembro de 2002,” 2002. http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/
decreto/2002/d4552.htm (accessed Jun. 15, 2020).
[219] International Labour Organisation, Ending forced labour by 2030: A review of policies and programmes -
2nd edition. 2018.
[220] Fabio Teixeira, “Brazil to issue ‘dirty list’ of employers using slave labor based on court findings,” Reuters,
2019. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-trafficking-dirtylist/brazil-to-issue-dirty-list-of-
employers-using-slave-labor-based-on-court-findings-idUSKCN1TX30L (accessed Jun. 16, 2020).
[221] M. da Economia, “Inspeção do Trabalho,” 2020. https://sit.trabalho.gov.br/portal/.
[222] UNICA, “Projeto RenovAção,” 2015, [Online]. Available: https://silo.tips/download/relatorio-report-projeto-
renovaao-project-renovaction-qualificaao-transformando#.
[223] BONSUCRO, “Audit guidance for the production standard including Bonsucro EU audit guidance for the
production standard,” p. 89, 2011, [Online]. Available: http://www.bonsucro.com/wp-content/
uploads/2017/01/Audit-Guidance-for-the-Production-Standard.pdf.
[224] BONSUCRO, “Certificate Holders,” 2021. https://www.bonsucro.com/certified-members-3/ (accessed Jul.
12, 2021).
[225] BONSUCRO, “Dashboard áreas certificadas Bonsucro.” 2021.
[226] Raízen, “Resumo Corporativo,” Safra 2020/2021, p. 72, 2021.
[227] CONAB, “Serie Histórica - Agricola.” 2020, [Online]. Available: https://www.conab.gov.br/info-agro/safras/
serie-historica-das-safras.
[228] Food and Drug Administration, “HACCP Principles & Application Guidelines,” 2017. https://www.fda.gov
food/hazard-analysis-critical-control-point-haccp/haccp-principles-application-guidelines (accessed May
11, 2021).
[229] UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES, “What Is Integrated
Pest Management (IPM)?,” UC ANR Statewide IPM Program, 2021. https://www2.ipm.ucanr.edu/what-is
IPM/?src=redirect2refresh (accessed May 11, 2021).
[230] R. et al. Antink, “The Circularity Gap Report,” Platf. Accel. Circ. Econ. This, p. 56, 2019, [Online]. Available:
https://www.circularity-gap.world/.
[231] WBCSD, “Circular Transition Indicators V1.0: Metrics for business, by business,” World Bus. Counc.
Sustain. Dev., no. Jan, p. 51, 2020, [Online]. Available: https://www.wbcsd.org/Programs/Circular
Economy/Factor-10/Metrics-Measurement/Resources/Circular-Transition-Indicators-V1.0-Metrics-for
business-by-business.
[232] C. et al. Schmidt, “The Circularity Gap Report 2020,” pp. 1–67, 2020.
[232] INMETRO, “Orientações gerais sobre os requisitos da ABNT NBR IS/IEC 17025:2017,” vol. 087, p. 66, 2018.
REFERENCES
[323] ISCC, “ISCC System,” 2020. https://www.iscc-system.org/ (accessed Mar. 02, 2021).
[233] ABNT, “Atualização da ABNT NBR ISO 9001:2008 para a ABNT NBR ISO 9001:2015,” 2015.
[234] ISO 14001:2015, “Environmental management systems — Requirements with guidance for use,” 2015.
https://www.iso.org/standard/60857.html.
[235] CARB, “LCFS Pathway Certified Carbon Intensities,” California Air Resources Board, 2017. https://www.
arb.ca.gov/fuels/lcfs/fuelpathways/pathwaytable.htm.
[236] Sedex, “Nossa Plataforma de Dados Éticos é chamada Sedex Advance,” 2021. https://www.sedex.com/
pt-br/nossos-servicos/sedex-advance/#:~:text=O nosso produto Sedex Advance,em mais de 155 países.
(accessed May 11, 2021).
[237] Halal Certification, “WHAT IS HALAL CERTIFICATION?,” 2021. https://www.szutest.com/halal-certification/
(accessed May 11, 2021).
[238] SGS, “GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICE (GMP) CERTIFICATION,” 2021. https://www.sgsgroup.com.br/
en/agriculture-food/alternative-fuels/audits-and-certification/good-manufacturing-practice-gmp-
certification (accessed May 11, 2021).
[239] Food and Drug Administration, “HACCP Principles & Application Guidelines,” 2017. https://www.fda.gov/
food/hazard-analysis-critical-control-point-haccp/haccp-principles-application-guidelines (accessed May
11, 2021).
[240] UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES, “What Is Integrated
Pest Management (IPM)?,” UC ANR Statewide IPM Program, 2021. https://www2.ipm.ucanr.edu/what-is-
IPM/?src=redirect2refresh (accessed May 11, 2021).
[241] R. et al. Antink, “The Circularity Gap Report,” Platf. Accel. Circ. Econ. This, p. 56, 2019, [Online]. Available:
https://www.circularity-gap.world/.
[242] WBCSD, “Circular Transition Indicators V1.0: Metrics for business, by business,” World Bus. Counc.
Sustain. Dev., no. Jan, p. 51, 2020, [Online]. Available: https://www.wbcsd.org/Programs/Circular-
Economy/Factor-10/Metrics-Measurement/Resources/Circular-Transition-Indicators-V1.0-Metrics-for-
business-by-business.
[243] C. et al. Schmidt, “The Circularity Gap Report 2020,” pp. 1–67, 2020.
[244] CNI - Confederação Nacional da Indústria, “Circular Economy - Strategic Path for Brazilian Industry,” p.
76, 2020.
[245] L. H. A. Vera, S. M. G. de L. Montenegro, and S. R. da Silva, “Atuação da cobrança pelo uso da água de
domínio da união como instrumento de gestão de recursos hídricos na bacia hidrográfica do Rio São
Francisco,” Rev. Bras. Recur. Hidricos, vol. 22, 2017, doi: 10.1590/2318-0331.011715171.
[246] G. Santos, “Economia circular,” Cons. Empres. Bras. para o Desenvolv. Sustentável - CEBDS, p. 15, 2019,
[Online]. Available: https://d335luupugsy2.cloudfront.net/cms/files/14773/1573211143CEBDS_
EconomiaCircular_REV.pdf.
[247] C. da S. Bueno, J. M. F. J. da Silveira, A. M. Buainain, and M. E. S. Dal Poz, “Aplicando rede de IPCs
para identificar a fronteira tecnológica da bioenergia,” Rev. Bras. Inovação, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 259–286,
2018, doi: 10.20396/rbi.v17i2.8652020.
[248] F. De Araújo Martins, T. Martim, A. M. Corrêa, and F. Ferreira de Oliveira, “A produção do Etanol de
segunda geração a partir do bagaço da cana-de-açúcar,” Rev. Latino-Americana Inovação e Eng.
Produção, vol. 2, no. 3, p. 5, 2014, doi: 10.5380/relainep.v2i3.38404.
[249] EMF, “The New Plastics Economy: Rethinking the Future of Plastics & Catalysing Action,” Ellen MacArthur
Found., 2017, [Online]. Available: https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/publications/the-new-
plastics-economy-rethinking-the-future-of-plastics-catalysing-action.
[250]] FAPESP, “BIOEN,” FAPESP Bioenergy Research Program. https://fapesp.br/en/bioen.
[251] Raízen Caarapó S.A. Açúcar e Álcool, “Relatório de impacto ao meio ambiente complementar: ampliação
da capacidade de moagem - EIA/RIMA,” Inst. Meio Ambient. Mato Grosso do Sul - IMASUL, p. 156, 2013,
[Online]. Available: http://www.servicos.ms.gov.br/imasuldownloads/rimas/RIMA_RAÍZEN_CAARAPÓ_SA_
AÇÚCAR_E_ÁLCOOL.pdf.
REFERENCES
[252] Raízen, “Pulse,” Hub de Inovação, 2017. https://www.pulsehub.com.br/index.html (accessed Apr. 26, 2021).
[253] M. Banse, P. Nowicki, and H. Van Meijl, Sugarcane Ethanol: Contributions to Climate Change Mitigation
and the Environment. 2008.
[254] J. R. Moreira, “Water Use and Impacts Due Ethanol Production in Brazil,” Water, pp. 1–24, 2002.
[255] JRC, “Critical raw materials and the circular economy.” p. 102, 2018, [Online]. Available: https://op.europa.
eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/d0c609d2-f4ef-11e7-be11-01aa75ed71a1/language-en.
[256] I. de C. Macedo, “A energia da cana-de-açúcar - Doze estudos sobre a agroindústria da cana-de-açúcar no
Brasil e a sua sustentabilidade,” UNICA - União da Agroindústria Canavieira do Estado São Paulo, 2005.
[257] Raízen, “Bonsucro Inspire Award Nominations 2019 Award for Ground-Breaking Innovations ReduSa
Program Reduction in Water Consumption,” 2019.
[258] Raízen, “Histórico ReduZa - Dados Captacao Safra 20’21.” 2021.
[259] Federação das Indústrias do Estado de São Paulo, “12o PRÊMIO DE CONSERVAÇÃO E REÚSO DE ÁGUA
– CASES VENCEDORES,” 2017. https://www.fiesp.com.br/indices-pesquisas-e-publicacoes/12o-premio-
de-conservacao-e-reuso-de-agua-cases-vencedores/.
[260] Instituto Nacional de Processamento de Embalagens Vazias, “Sistema de logística reversa,” 2020.
[261] F. Cherubini, A. H. Strømman, and S. Ulgiati, “Influence of allocation methods on the environmental
performance of biorefinery products - A case study,” Resour. Conserv. Recycl., vol. 55, no. 11, pp. 1070–
1077, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.06.001.
[262] D. Khatiwada, J. Seabra, S. Silveira, and A. Walter, “Accounting greenhouse gas emissions in the lifecycle
of Brazilian sugarcane bioethanol: Methodological references in European and American regulations,”
Energy Policy, vol. 47, pp. 384–397, 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.enpol.2012.05.005.
[263] L. Luo, E. van der Voet, and G. Huppes, “Life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of bioethanol
from sugarcane in Brazil,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 13, no. 6–7, pp. 1613–1619, 2009, doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2008.09.024.
[264] J. Hill et al., “Climate change and health costs of air emissions from biofuels and gasoline,” Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. U. S. A., vol. 106, no. 6, pp. 2077–2082, 2009, doi: 10.1073/pnas.0812835106.
[265] M. Q. Wang, J. Han, Z. Haq, W. E. Tyner, M. Wu, and A. Elgowainy, “Energy and greenhouse gas emission
effects of corn and cellulosic ethanol with technology improvements and land use changes,” Biomass and
Bioenergy, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 1885–1896, 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.01.028.
[266] O. Cavalett, M. F. Chagas, J. E. A. Seabra, and A. Bonomi, “Comparative LCA of ethanol versus gasoline
in Brazil using different LCIA methods,” Int. J. Life Cycle Assess., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 647–658, 2013, doi:
10.1007/s11367-012-0465-0.
[267] K. Koponen, S. Soimakallio, K. L. Kline, A. Cowie, and M. Brandão, “Quantifying the climate effects of
bioenergy – Choice of reference system,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 81, no. May 2017, pp. 2271–
2280, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.rser.2017.05.292.
[268] L. Wang, R. Quiceno, C. Price, R. Malpas, and J. Woods, “Economic and GHG emissions analyses for
sugarcane ethanol in Brazil: Looking forward,” Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 40, pp. 571–582, 2014, doi:
10.1016/j.rser.2014.07.212.
[269] A. de M. Freitas and M. C. Solci, “Caracterização do MP10 e MP2,5 e distribuição por tamanho de cloreto,
nitrato e sulfato em atmosfera urbana e rural de Londrina,” Quim. Nova, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 1750–1754,
2009, doi: 10.1590/s0100-40422009000700013.
[270] J. E. Velandia Vargas, “Análise da competitividade ambiental de veículos elétricos no Brasil no cenário
atual e futuro,” 2016, [Online]. Available: http://repositorio.unicamp.br/handle/REPOSIP/325723.
[271] R. Nealer, D. Reichmuth, and D. Anair, “Cleaner Cars from Cradle to Grave: How Electric Cars Beat
Gasoline Cars on Lifetime Global Warming Emissions,” Union Concerned Sci., pp. 1–54, 2015, [Online].
Available: https://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/11/Cleaner-Cars-from-Cradle-to-Grave
full-report.pdf%0Ahttp://www.ucsusa.org/sites/default/files/attach/2015/11/Cleaner-Cars-from-Cradle
to-Grave-full-report.pdf.
REFERENCES

RAIZEN Paper Etanol Versao Completa Ingles v3 060821 2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

RAIZEN Paper Etanol Versao Completa Ingles v3 060821 2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SUSTAINABILITY

Summary of the technical report prepared by Raízen with advisory

Raízen has a diversified portfolio of renewable products aimed at contributing to

best guarantees. In addition to quality, sustainability is a value for Raízen and

Sustainable production of agricultural commodities is one of the greatest

1. Biofuels in the transition to a low-carbon economy 07

1.2 Reduction of GHG emissions in Brazil 08

1.4 The role of ethanol in combating climate change 12

1.4.1 The low carbon footprint of sugarcane ethanol 12

1.4.2 Relationship between ethanol use and human health 13

1.4.3 Ethanol is highly competitive compared to other technologies 15

1.4.4 The role of ethanol in the context of individual mobility transition 15

1.4.5 Biofuels already have infrastructure and policies in place 19

1.4.6 IPCC, IEA and IRENA consider biofuels to be essential in 21

1.4.7 Synergistic effects between sugarcane ethanol, income, 22

1.5 Raízen’s high-tech, low-carbon profile 23

2. Sustainable Land Use 26

2.1 Availability of land in the world 26

2.2 Challenges for sustainable land use in Brazil 26

2.2.1 Land use and governance in Brazil 27

2.2.2 Technology for better production 29

2.2.3 Results of land use management and combination 30

2.3.1 The relationship between sugarcane and deforestation 33

2.3.2 Sugarcane and increase in natural vegetation 33

2.3.3 Sugarcane as an land-saving energy solution 33

2.3.4 Regenerative Agriculture 35

2.4 Land use and production at Raízen 37

2.4.1 Raízen as a vector for the recovery of native vegetation 37

2.4.2 Land-saving technologies at Raízen 38

3. Respect for Human Rights 39

3.1 Brazil - Human rights and working conditions: 39

3.2 Sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector - Ensuring good working 40

3.3 Working conditions at Raízen and its supply chain 42

4. Approach to circular economy 46

4.1 Brazil in the era of circular economy: legal framework and 46

4.2.1 Circularity in the sugar, ethanol, and bioenergy sector 48

4.2.2 Exploring the circular process of sugarcane production 49

4.2.2.1 Use and total energy production 50

4.2.2.2 Reuse of industrial waste as fertilizers in sugarcane fields 50

4.2.2.3 Efficient use and closed circuit water system 51

4.2.2.4 Reverse logistics for agrochemical packaging 52

Figure 1 - Total net CO2 emissions at global level

Source: IPCC (2018). [1] Key: Figure 1 shows

Figure 2 - Share of the sectors in GHG emissions

1.2 REDUCTION OF GHG EMISSIONS IN BRAZIL

Figure 4 - Profile of the energy mix in different territories

Brasil (2019) 46%

Mundo (2017) 14%

OCDE (2017) 11%

China (2019) 10%

0 0,25 0,5 0,75 1

TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES IN THE SECTOR CONTINUE TO EVOLVE

Figure 5 – Evolution of avoided CO2eq emissions since the signing

AS ILLUSTRATED, BIOELECTRICITY FROM SUGARCANE IS GENERATED MAINLY IN THE DRY

Figure 6 – Production of bioelectricity, hydroelectric reservoirs, and flags

Source: UNICA (2019) [29]. Key: Production of

SUGARCANE ETHANOL IS A COMPETITIVE AND READILY AVAILABLE

1.4.1 THE LOW CARBON FOOTPRINT OF SUGARCANE ETHANOL

• Not related to deforestation (section 3.3.1)

• High efficiency in power generation per hectare (section 3.3.3)

1.4.2 RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ETHANOL USE AND HUMAN HEALTH

Source: RFA (2014) [68]

Figure 8 - Breakdown of production costs for 1G/2G ethanol