No abstract

Agricultural management practices that promote net carbon (C) accumulation in the soil have been considered as an important potential mitigation option to combat global warming. The change in the sugarcane harvesting system, to one which incorporates C into the soil from crop residues, is the focus of this work. The main objective was to assess and discuss the changes in soil organic C stocks caused by the conversion of burnt to unburnt sugarcane harvesting systems in Brazil, when considering the main soils and climates associated with this crop. For this purpose, a dataset was obtained from a literature review of soils under sugarcane in Brazil. Although not necessarily from experimental studies, only paired comparisons were examined, and for each site the dominant soil type, topography and climate were similar. The results show a mean annual C accumulation rate of 1.5 Mg ha −1 year −1 for the surface to 30-cm depth (0.73 and 2.04 Mg ha −1 year −1 for sandy and clay soils, respectively) caused by the conversion from a burnt to an unburnt sugarcane harvesting system. The findings suggest that soil should be included in future studies related to life cycle assessment and C footprint of Brazilian sugarcane ethanol.

Data from the 1990-1994 period presented in the "Brazil's Initial National Communication" document indicated that the country is one of the top world greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters. A large majority of Brazil's GHG emissions come from deforestation mainly of the Amazon biome for agriculture and livestock land uses. This unique inventory is now out of date. Thus, the aims of this review were (i) to update estimates of the GHG emissions for the Brazilian territory, (ii) to estimate the sinks to provide calculations of the GHG net emissions for the 1990-2005 period, (iii) to calculate the actual and estimate shares of agricultural and livestock activities, and (iv) to discuss in light of the new figures and patterns the best mitigation options for Brazil. Total emissions in CO 2 -eq increased by 17% during the 1994-2005 period. CO 2 represented 72.3% of the total, i.e. a small decrease, in favour of non-CO 2 GHG, in relation to 1994 when its share was 74.1%. The increase of all GHG excluding Land Use Change and Forestry (LUCF) was 41.3% over the period [1994][1995][1996][1997][1998][1999][2000][2001][2002][2003][2004][2005]. Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (CAIT) -World Resources Institute (WRI) estimated a higher increase (48.9%) that classified Brazil at the 69th position. Using our estimates Brazil will fall to the 78th position. But in both cases Brazil increased in clearly lower values than the tendency calculated for China and India, two major emitters, with increases of 88.8% and 62.1%, respectively. Brazil's increase is less than those presented for some countries in Annex 1 that are submitted to a quota of reduction, e.g. Spain with 55.6% of increase and New Zealand with 45.8%. Brazil also is below the average increase shown by non-Annex I countries, estimated to be 61.3%, but above the world average (28.1%). Besides the effort to curb emissions from the energy and deforestation sectors, it is now a top priority to implement a national program to promote mitigation efforts concerning the agricultural and livestock sectors. These mitigation options should not be only focused on emission reductions, but also prone enhancement of the carbon sink. Such a program would be easy to be implemented, because several mitigation strategies have already proven to be efficient, simple to adopt and economically viable. Key words: CO 2 -equivalent (CO 2 -eq), soil, inventory, land use change and forestry EMISSÕES DE GASES DO EFEITO ESTUFA DO BRASIL:IMPORTÂNCIA DA AGRICULTURA E PASTAGEM No entanto, está acima da média global que foi de 28,1%. Além de trabalhar pela redução das emissões dos setores de energia e desmatamento, o Brasil deve agora ter como meta prioritária a implantação de um programa nacional de incentivo ás mitigações nos setores agrícola e pecuário. Tais opções de mitigação não deverão se concentrar somente na redução das emissões, mas também favorecer a fixação de carbono. Tal programa seria de fácil implementação, pois diversas estratégias de mitigação já provaram ser eficientes, fáceis de adota...

No abstract

No abstract