Sistemas de información para la gestión ambiental en la agricultura

Tercer Seminário Regional Agricultura e cambio Climático:
Nuevas tecnologias em la mitigacion y adaptation de
La agricultura al cambio climatico
27 y 28 de septembre 2012
Sistemas de informacion para la gestion ambiental em la agricultura
Eduardo Delgado Assad
Embrapa - Brasil

Una vision integral de la gestion ambiental, la
gestion de riesgo y la adaptation de la
agricultura y los cambios climáticos
Embrapa Informática agropecuária

EVOLUTION OF BRAZILIAN MITIGATION TARGETS
NATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY (PNMC)
DECREE 7.390/2010
• Sanctioned right after COP-15, when the Brazilian government
announced voluntary GHG emissions reduction targets, later
included in the Copenhagen Accord.
• Sets up a reduction target between 36.1 and 38.9% in relation to
the baseline projected to 2020.
–The baseline was calculated using data from the Second National
Emissions Inventory released in 2010.
• Establishes sectoral mitigation and adaptation plans
• Defines the National Climate Change Fund (Climate Fund) as
main financial instrument
• Regulated by Decree no. 7.390/2010.

NATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY
DECREE 7.390/2010
• According to Decree no. 7.390/2010, the revised National
Climate Change Plan will be composed of the following sectoral
mitigation plans:
–Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Deforestation in the
Legal Amazon (PPCDAm)
–Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Deferestation and
Wildfires in the Cerrado (PPCerrado)
–Ten Year Energy Plan (PDE, from 2007-2016)
–Low Carbon Agriculture Plan (Plan ABC), and
–Emissions Reduction in the Iron and Steel Industry.

NATIONAL CLIMATE CHANGE POLICY
DECREE 7.390/2010
• Emissions projections in 2020: 3.236 millions tCO2-eq
• Reduction target:
–Art. 6: actions will be implemented in order to reduce between
1.168 milhões tCO2-eq and 1.259 milhões tCO2-eq of the total
projected emissions
•1.168 millions tCO2-eq – 36,1%
•1.259 millions tCO2-eq – 38,9%

source: INPE (2010)
Deforestation rate in the Amazon (thousands of Km2
/ha)
Lowest deforestation rate since 2005

Reducing emissions in the Amazon CO2
(million tons per year)
projected
emission
For 2020
Reduction
equivalent to
67% of
projected
emissions for
2020

Related issues, but diferent nature
Each four
years
Commitment
by the
UNFCCC
(Specific
Guidelines)
Estimates
Inventory
commitment
made under
Decree
7.390/2010 year
Monitoring
Actions
associated
with the
Sectorial
Plans
?

Sectoral Plans
In preparation:
- Transportation;
- Industry;
- Mining;
- Health;
- Aquaculture &
Fisheries

Monitoring and estimate Coordination
- Embrapa;
- Unicamp;
-Agriculture
clima network.
Monitoring Centers Monitoring Centers
Focused on adaptation
Amazon
deforestation
cerrados Energy Trans
portation
Industry Mining
Health Aquaculture &
Fisheries

Tmax (Precis-A2)
2010 – media 1960-1990
8 a 6.5
6 a 5
4.5 a 3
2.5 a 1.5
1 a 0
-0.5 a -2
[⁰C]

Tmax (Precis-A2)
2020 – media 1960-1990
8 a 6.5
6 a 5
4.5 a 3
2.5 a 1.5
1 a 0
-0.5 a -2
[⁰C]

Tmax (Precis-A2)
2030 – media 1960-1990
8 a 6.5
6 a 5
4.5 a 3
2.5 a 1.5
1 a 0
-0.5 a -2
[⁰C]

Tmax (Precis-A2)
2040 – media 1960-1990
8 a 6.5
6 a 5
4.5 a 3
2.5 a 1.5
1 a 0
-0.5 a -2
[⁰C]

Análisis de riesgos climáticos

Inicial
Vegetativo
Reproduccion
Maduracionração
Kc
Zonification de riesgos climáticos
la capacidad de agua del suelo
Evapotranspiracion precipitacion

Balance Hídrico Secuencial
+
Análisis frecuencial de los resultados
Precipitacion
Diária
ETP
Promedio decendial
Fecha de siembra
Tipo de suelo
Tamaño del Ciclo
Datos Fijos
Metodologia (1/2)
ISNA = ETR/ETM
Datos Variábles
AnoAno ValorValor
11 ISNA(Ano1)ISNA(Ano1)
22 ISNA(Ano2)ISNA(Ano2)
...... ......
NN ISNA(AnoN)ISNA(AnoN)
N Anos
X estaciones
La cartografia
De lo ISNA
Fase III

0 1 2 3 4 5 33 34 35
3ª fase fenológica
• • •
dias
ISNA
•
fISNA
(x)
0
1
Isna= 65%
P
•
••
•
•
•
•
•
“critério”
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Resulta
• 44 culturas con zonificación hecha todos los años
• Enlace directo con la ciencia , tecnología y las políticas
públicas
• Parte de la evaluación de los impactos económicos
hecho con la base de la zonificación climática
• 17 años de la política pública y la orientación del
crédito agrícola in ejecución
• www.agritempo.gov.br

Impactos del cambio climático sobre la
agricultura
• simulación de ocho modelos diferentes (tres
en downscale)
• cinco culturas
• pastos
• Período de 2010 a 2030

Brazil Base Year 2010 PESSIMISTIC OPTIMISTIC
CROP
Planted Area 2009 (ha) 2020 (ha) ∆ (%) 2030 (ha) ∆ (%) 2020 (ha) ∆ (%) 2030 (ha) ∆ (%)
Cotton
814.696 775.508 -4,8 774.457 -4,9 777.019 -4,6 776.974 -4,6
Rice
2.904.702 2.688.658 -7,4 2.617.461 -9,9 2.615.513 -10 2.640.323 -9,1
Sugarcane
8.845.659 17.783.411 101 16.921.749 91 18.305.604 107 18.418.819 108
Bean
Summer
season 2.612.240 1.161.420 -55,5 1.121.558 -57,1 1.197.625 -54,2 1.187.576 -54,5
Autumn
season 1.715.000 542.749 -68,4 519.370 -69,7 622.053 -63,7 586.677 -65,8
Mayze
Summer
season 9.463.191 7.619.872 -19 7.376.636 -22 8.360.960 -12 8.226.524 -13
Autumn
season 4.799.663 4.175.053 -13 4.063.815 -15 4.507.646 -6 4.455.642 -7
Soybean
21.761.782 16.472.685 -24 15.634.280 -28 18.882.508 -13 18.434.357 -15
Rainfed Wheat
2.345.496 1.987.386 -15,3 1.877.438 -20 1.383.302 -41 1.613.835 -31,2
table synthesis

Figure 2. rd29A:DREB1A / ahas transgenic soybean plants (left, T2) and the original veriety, BR16 plants (right)
after applied drought stress (5% of humidity:29days, then 2.5%:17days). The plants without stress (15.0%) were
growing normally like the plants left of this picture. This picture was taken in April 17, the day before 9th evaluation
in Figure 3.
P58: 2.5% BR16: 2.5%
BR-16 siensien gene
2.5% Umidad del suelo
P58 (BR-16 concon gene)
2.5% Umidad del suelo
Expresión de genes tolerantes a la sequía en soja

0 1 4 5 7 8 9 10
Anos
Cronograma para obtenção de uma variedade de soja
X
AB
Hibridação Avanço Seleção Ensaios Semente Semente Semente Produtor
de de de genética básica certificada rural
gerações progênies competição fiscalizada
(F2 a F4)* F5
A B
* Duas gerações ao ano
Caderno Caderno Registro Licenciamento
de de SNPC
cruzamento avaliação
Tiempo para tener un cultivar adaptado

Cultures
Plant Breeding
Million
US$/YEAR
BENEFIT
COST
RICE 18.9 8,2
COTTON 21.1 10,7
COFFEE 57.8 15,4
BEAN 28.3 7,1
SOYBEAN 210.0 16,7
CORN 196.7 4,3
Costs/benefits of Adaptation
Plant breeding – Year 2020
Total = US$532.8 million/year

ManzanaManzana
Proyección: ElProyección: El
aumento de laaumento de la
temperatura a 2temperatura a 2oo
CC

BananaBanana
Proyección:Proyección:
El aumento de laEl aumento de la
temperatura atemperatura a
2oC2oC

Mes de noviembre Actual Mes de noviembre 2070
Mes de noviembre de 2070 con
reducción del consumo de agua en 20%
Estratégia biotecnologica
Mes de noviembre 2070 con
Ciclo de 110 dias

Estrategia de MitigacionEstrategia de Mitigacion

Emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O in tonnes of CO2
equivalents by Brazilian agriculture for 1990, 1994, 2000
and 2005, according to the Second Brazilian Inventory of
GHG Emissions and Removals (MCTI, 2011).
Grains
Area
Production and planted area with grain crops from
1990 to 2011
Brazilian agriculture has experienced a continuous increase in grain production, but
with a limited increase in cropped area, which is attributed to technology adoption.
This scenario has resulted in an increase in GHG emissions.

A - Methane emissions
B - Nitrous oxide emissions
Nitrous oxide
emissions
represented about 35
% of the overall
emissions from
Brazilian agriculture
Brazilian GHG inventory for the agriculture sector (2005)
GHG estimates are based on IPCC 1996 guidelines (Tiers 1 and 2) especially for the N2O
inventory.

Arable crops Cattle ranching Biofuel production
N Fertilizer
Legume species
Grazing animals –
excreta deposited
on pasture
Vinasse from
bioethanol
production from
sugarcane
Research are under way to develop emission factors for the
different cropping environments in Brazil.
Issues under evaluation
IPCC direct EF = 1.25% IPCC direct EF = 2.0%
N2O CH4N2O
Investigated GHGs

N2O fluxes measurement
Fonte :Bruno Alves Embrapa Agrobiologia

Static chamber
Top-base type
W-40 x L-60 cm
12 cm height
8 cm inserted in soil
Rubber – aluminum coated top
to improve insulation
The 20 mL glass vials are promptly
evacuated (-80 kPa) to receive 25 mL of
the chamber headspace sample taken by
using polyethylene syringes

Sampling procedure
• Gas sampling once a day, always in the morning
between 9:00 h and 10:00 h.
• Daily sampling during the first 10 days after fertilizer
application.
• Most of the results were obtained from a
crop season and not necessarily from a
whole year.

Land use
Evaluation
period1
(dias)
N-Fertilizer
(source - kg N
ha-1
)
Soil type
EF based on
reference area
(%)
Londrina, PR Red Latosol
Maize, SP rotation (yr 1, 2) 136/141 Urea – 80 0.08/0.04
Maize, zero tillage,ZT)(yr 1,
2)
136/141 Urea – 80 0.13/0.08
Passo Fundo, RS
Dark Red
Latosol
Wheat ZT rotation 137 Urea – 40 0.13
Soybean/wheat ZT (yr 1, 2) 1 year Fert+Res –
120/116
0.56/0.81
Soybean/wheat PC (yr 1, 2) 1 year Fert+Res –
126/133
0.47/0.52
Maize/wheat ZT 1 year Fert+Res – 162 0.41
Maize/wheat CT 1 year Fert+Res – 141 0.70
Sorghun/wheat ZT 1 year Fert+Res – 193 0.24
Sorghun/wheat CT 1 year Fert+Res – 193 0.29
Santo Antônio de Goiás, GO
Dark Red
Latosol
Maize ZT rotation 140 Urea – 80 0.22
Highland rice ZT (yr 1, 2) 133/132 Urea – 90 0.13/0.14
Irrigated common bean ZT 149 Urea – 80 0.12
Seropédica, RJ
Maize CT 120 Urea – 50 0.16
Maize CT 120 Urea – 100 Red-Yellow
Argisol
0.35
Maize CT 120 Urea – 150 0.33
Elephant grass 180 Urea – 40 0.18
Emission factor of N2O
from Brazilian
agricultural systems
Emission factor of N2O
from Brazilian
agricultural systems
Direct emission factor of
N2O obtained in Brazil
General mean and
confidence interval
0.30 % (0.20 – 0.47%)
Direct emission factor of
N2O obtained in Brazil
General mean and
confidence interval
0.30 % (0.20 – 0.47%)
Direct Emission Factor
recommended
in the IPCC 2006 guidelines
1% (0.3 – 3%)
Direct Emission Factor
recommended
in the IPCC 2006 guidelines
1% (0.3 – 3%)
Data from Embrapa Agrobiologia, Soybean,
Wheat and Rice and Bean Centers
Data from Embrapa Agrobiologia, Soybean,
Wheat and Rice and Bean Centers

N2O emissions derived from cattle excreta in
pastures
IPCC: 2% of N-excreta is lost as N2O

Soil N2O emissions from cattle urine and faeces
Preliminary data indicates that the N2O direct emission factor for
urine is between 1.2 to 1.4 % and for faeces it is between 0.1 to 0.2
%.
N2O-EF1 from “Tier 1” of IPCC guidelines is 2 % of the total N in
cattle excreta .
For the Brazilian savannah region that concentrates about 40 %
of cattle herd, the weighed average emission factor would vary
from 0.5 to 0.7 %, assuming no more than 60% of excreted N is in
the urine form.

0-50-5
30-4030-40
20-3020-30
10-2010-20
5-105-10
60-8060-80
40-5040-50
50-6050-60
80-100 cm80-100 cm
Quantification of soil C stocks
“Shovelometrics”
Trenches 120 cm depth
The soil density must be measured accurately
to correct for differential compaction
Fonte : Robert Boddey Embrapa Agrobiologia

Region Veg.
Nativa
Pastura
degradad
os
Pastura
recuperada
ILP ILPF
.........................C (t ha-1
) ............
Sur 59 22 73 50 69
Sudeste 86 49 60 91 95
Centro
Oeste
60 42 52 79 53
Las reservas de carbono en suelos de diferentes sistemas agrícolas en el sur,
sureste y Midwest (0-30 cm). Brasil

Coordination:
Embrapa Southeast
Cattle – São Carlos,
SP
Participant
institutions:
Animal Sciences
Institute – Nova
Odessa, SP
Embrapa Environment
– Jaguariúna, SP
PA 4.1. Evaluation of
methane emission
from ruminants
4.1.1. Evaluation of
methane emission from the
rumen of dairy cattle
rumen of beef cattle in the
Southeast region
rumen of crossbreed dairy
cattle with controled
ingestion of forage
rumen of beef cattle in the
Pantanal region
4.1.4. Methane analysis and
sulfur hexafluoride by gas
chromatography

Methane collection from
dairy cattle

Methane emission factors for beef cattle (Nelore) in the
Southeast of Brazil (tropical climate)
CH4 g/d*
Category Weight % of total
herd
Winter Spring Summer Fall
CH4 kg/animal
year
Bulls 500 > 1.4 131 192 274 168 69.7
Cows 350-450 36.6 116 150 198 161 57.0
Heifers (7 months
to 2 years)
180-250 11.4 95 99 159 159 46.7
Heifers (2-3 years) 250-351 7.5 103 114 194 130 49.3
Males (7 months to
2 years)
180-250 9.6 95 99 159 159 46.7
Males (2-3 years) 250-351 5.0 103 114 194 130 49.3
Males (3-4 years) 350-450 1.6 116 150 198 161 57.0
Males (4 years ) 450> 0.4 131 192 274 161 69.1
Mean - - 111 139 206 154 53.0

Buenos Pastizales
Son eficientes en lo sequestro
de carbono

recuperación de las pasturas
Degradacion de las pasturas
Recuperacion de 15 millones de hectareas

Rotação lavoura-pasto
Anos
75 76 78 82 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
Matériaorgânica(%)
0
2
3
4
5
Rotação contínua de soja/milho
Pasto depois de lavoura
Lavoura depois de pasto
Sousa, et al., 1997
Sucessão soja/milho
Pasto depois de
lavoura
Lavoura depois de
pasto
Teores de matéria orgânica do solo

60Fonte :Embrapa agrobiologia
las emisiones de CO2 co aumento de peso

64
PASTAGEM
PERDA DE PRODUÇÃO (%)
Escenario pesimista Escenário optimista
PA 27 28 29 25 25 25
TO 39 40 42 37 37 38
MA 46 46 47 45 45 45
PI 61 61 63 59 60 60
CE 67 68 68 66 67 67
RN 66 67 67 65 65 66
PB 64 65 66 63 64 64
PE 57 58 58 56 56 57
AL 51 52 52 51 51 51
SE 48 48 49 47 47 47
BA 55 55 56 53 54 54
MG 45 45 46 42 42 43
ES 38 39 40 36 36 37
RJ 30 31 31 28 28 28
SP 27 28 29 23 23 24
PR 11 12 14 7 6 8
SC 0 0 0 0 0 0
RS 4 4 5 0 0 0
MS 31 31 33 27 26 27
MT 37 37 39 34 34 35

Agricultural
Management
Area
Million
ha
Mitigation
MTCO²eq
Cost
Billion
US$
Years
Recovery of Degradeted
Pastures
15.0 101.7 10.9 10
Crop Livestock
Integration
4,0 27.1 19.0 10
No Tillage 8,0 14.6 1.3 10
Biological Fixation of
Nitrogen
11.0 20.0 0.2 10
Reforestation 1.5 3.0 8.8 10
Total 39.5 166.4 40.2 10
Reduction of CO² emission, area considered and cost of mitigation activities until 2020
Adapted from
ASSAD, E. D. & BARIONI, L. G.
Embrapa Informática

assad@cnptia.embrapa.br

Sistemas de información para la gestión ambiental en la agricultura

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to Sistemas de información para la gestión ambiental en la agricultura

Similar to Sistemas de información para la gestión ambiental en la agricultura (20)

More from FAO

More from FAO (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (14)

Sistemas de información para la gestión ambiental en la agricultura

Editor's Notes