Sistemas de información para la gestión ambiental en la agricultura

1. 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

2. Una vision integral de la gestion ambiental, la
gestion de riesgo y la adaptation de la
agricultura y los cambios climáticos
Eduardo Delgado Assad
Embrapa Informática agropecuária

3. 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.

4. EVOLUTION OF BRAZILIAN MITIGATION TARGETS
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.

5. EVOLUTION OF BRAZILIAN MITIGATION TARGETS
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%

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

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

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

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

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

11. Impactos y tendencias

12. Tmax (Precis-A2)
2010 – media 1960-1990
[⁰C]
8 a 6.5
6a5
4.5 a 3
2.5 a 1.5
1a0
-0.5 a -2

13. Tmax (Precis-A2)
2020 – media 1960-1990
[⁰C]
8 a 6.5
6a5
4.5 a 3
2.5 a 1.5
1a0
-0.5 a -2

14. Tmax (Precis-A2)
2030 – media 1960-1990
[⁰C]
8 a 6.5
6a5
4.5 a 3
2.5 a 1.5
1a0
-0.5 a -2

15. Tmax (Precis-A2)
2040 – media 1960-1990
[⁰C]
8 a 6.5
6a5
4.5 a 3
2.5 a 1.5
1a0
-0.5 a -2

21. Análisis de riesgos climáticos

22. Zonification de riesgos climáticos
Evapotranspiracion precipitacion
Kc
Ma
Reproduccion dur
ac
ção ionra
iv o
tat
ge
Ve
Inicial
la capacidad de agua del suelo

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

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

25. 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

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

33. table synthesis
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 91 108
8.845.659 17.783.411 101 16.921.749 18.305.604 107 18.418.819
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
Bean
Autumn
season 1.715.000 542.749 -68,4 519.370 -69,7 622.053 -63,7 586.677 -65,8
Summer
season 9.463.191 7.619.872 -19 7.376.636 -22 8.360.960 -12 8.226.524 -13
Mayze
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 -20 -31,2
2.345.496 1.987.386 -15,3 1.877.438 1.383.302 -41 1.613.835

34. Estrategia de Adaptación

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

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

37. Costs/benefits of Adaptation
Plant breeding – Year 2020
Total = US$532.8 million/year
Plant Breeding
BENEFIT
Cultures Million
COST
US$/YEAR
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

38. Manzana
Proyección: El
aumento de la
temperatura a 2oC

39. Banana
Proyección:
El aumento de la
temperatura a
2oC

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

41. Estrategia de Mitigacion

42. 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.
Grains
Area
Production and planted area with grain crops from Emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O in tonnes of CO2
1990 to 2011 equivalents by Brazilian agriculture for 1990, 1994, 2000
and 2005, according to the Second Brazilian Inventory of
GHG Emissions and Removals (MCTI, 2011).

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

44. Research are under way to develop emission factors for the
different cropping environments in Brazil.
Issues under evaluation
Arable crops Cattle ranching Biofuel production
N Fertilizer Grazing animals –
Vinasse from
excreta deposited
Legume species bioethanol
on pasture
production from
IPCC direct EF = 1.25% IPCC direct EF = 2.0% sugarcane
Investigated GHGs
N 2O N2 O CH4

45. N2O fluxes measurement
Fonte :Bruno Alves Embrapa Agrobiologia

46. 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
Fonte :Bruno Alves Embrapa Agrobiologia

47. 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.
Fonte :Bruno Alves Embrapa Agrobiologia

48. Evaluation N-Fertilizer EF based on
Emission factor of N2O Land use period1 (source - kg N Soil type reference area
Emission factor of N2O (dias) ha-1) (%)
from Brazilian
from Brazilian Londrina, PR Red Latosol
agricultural systems
agricultural systems Maize, SP rotation (yr 1, 2) 136/141 Urea – 80 0.08/0.04
Maize, zero tillage,ZT)(yr 1, 136/141 Urea – 80 0.13/0.08
2)
Passo Fundo, RS
Direct emission factor of
Direct emission factor of Wheat ZT rotation 137 Urea – 40 0.13
N2O obtained in Brazil
N2O obtained in Brazil Soybean/wheat ZT (yr 1, 2) 1 year Fert+Res – 0.56/0.81
120/116
General mean and
General mean and Soybean/wheat PC (yr 1, 2) 1 year Fert+Res – Dark Red 0.47/0.52
confidence interval 126/133 Latosol
confidence interval Maize/wheat ZT 1 year Fert+Res – 162 0.41
0.30 % (0.20 – 0.47%)
0.30 % (0.20 – 0.47%) 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
Maize ZT rotation 140 Urea – 80 0.22
Dark Red
Highland rice ZT (yr 1, 2) 133/132 Urea – 90 0.13/0.14
Latosol
Irrigated common bean ZT 149 Urea – 80 0.12
Seropédica, RJ
Direct Emission Factor
Direct Emission Factor Maize CT 120 Urea – 50 0.16
recommended
recommended Maize CT 120 Urea – 100 Red-Yellow 0.35
in the IPCC 2006 guidelines
in the IPCC 2006 guidelines Maize CT 120 Urea – 150 Argisol 0.33
1% (0.3 ––3%)
1% (0.3 3%) Elephant grass 180 Urea – 40 0.18
Elephant grass 180 Urea – 80 0.22
Elephant grass 180 Urea – 120 0.22
Elephant grass 180 Urea – 160 0.37
Data from Embrapa Agrobiologia, Soybean,
Data from Embrapa Agrobiologia, Soybean,
Wheat and Rice and Bean Centers
Wheat and Rice and Bean Centers
Fonte :Bruno Alves Embrapa Agrobiologia

49. N2O emissions derived from cattle excreta in
pastures
IPCC: 2% of N-excreta is lost as N2O
Fonte :Bruno Alves Embrapa Agrobiologia

50. 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.
Fonte :Bruno Alves Embrapa Agrobiologia

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

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

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

55. Methane collection from
dairy cattle

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

57. Buenos Pastizales
Son eficientes en lo sequestro
de carbono

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

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

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

61. 61

62. 62

63. 63

64. PERDA DE PRODUÇÃO (%)
PASTAGEM 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
64

65. Agricultural Area Mitigation Cost Years
Management Million MTCO²eq Billion
ha US$
Recovery of Degradeted 15.0 101.7 10.9 10
Pastures
Crop Livestock 4,0 27.1 19.0 10
Integration
No Tillage 8,0 14.6 1.3 10
Biological Fixation of 11.0 20.0 0.2 10
Nitrogen
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

66. Eduardo Delgado Assad
assad@cnptia.embrapa.br