| |
| 18/08/2009 |
| U.S. rules are positive for Brazilian Ethanol |
 |
| Source:
Eduardo Magossi, State Agency |
|
Analysis of U.S. agency appoints that the country's sugar cane fuel has lower emissions of carbon dioxide
SÃO PAULO - The representative of the Union of the Sugar Cane Industry (Unica) in North America, Joel Velasco, said that the presentation of the rules for implementation in the United States of the Renewable Fuel Standard, made by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) raises the chances of Brazilian ethanol, made from sugar cane, to be used in the U.S. territory in the coming years.
He says the draft rules submitted by EPA this Tuesday, 5, will now be placed for public evaluation for a period of 60 days. In the draft, the EPA's analysis points to the Brazilian sugar cane ethanol as renewable fuel with lower emissions of carbon dioxide compared with petrol. The ethanol from corn, in contrast, is penalized by the EPA data.
"The EPA's report presented today reveals, between the lines, that the ethanol from corn is only a transitional fuel and should not survive for long", he said. In the document, the EPA points to investments in advanced biofuels, which includes the reduction of over 50% of emissions of carbon dioxide in relation to petrol. "As the sugar cane ethanol over 50% reduces emissions of carbon dioxide, it can be considered an advanced biofuel and, following this concept, could be used to reduce emissions within the U.S.", he says.
Velasco also said that the United States today are targeting investments in the production of cellulosic ethanol. However, costs remain prohibitive and its production scale will require substantial government subsidies. "Today, the production of ethanol from cellulose already has subsidy of $ 1 per gallon in the U.S.," said the executive.
He says the production cost of a gallon of ethanol from cellulose in the USA is $ 5 without subsidies. The cost of a gallon of ethanol from sugarcane in Brazil imported without import tariff is only $ 1. "The ethanol from sugarcane is much cheaper," he said. |
|
