Brazilian Biodiesel Policy: Social and environmental considerations of sustainability

被引:81
|
作者
Gucciardi Garcez, Catherine Aliana [1 ]
de Souza Vianna, Joao Nildo [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Brasilia, Ctr Sustainable Dev, BR-70904970 Brasilia, DF, Brazil
关键词
Biodiesel policy; Sustainability considerations; Biofuels; FUEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.energy.2008.11.005
中图分类号
O414.1 [热力学];
学科分类号
摘要
The objective of this article is to analyze the Brazilian Biodiesel Policy (PNPB) and to identify the social and environmental aspects of sustainability that are present or absent within it. Biofuels, namely alcohol and biodiesel, have been increasing in popularity on a global scale due to their potential as alternative and renewable energy sources. Brazil, a vast country blessed with abundant natural resources and agricultural land, has emerged as a global leader in the production of biofuels. This article includes a brief analysis of the concept of sustainable development, which served as a basis to evaluate the Policy documents. Although PNPB's implementation, which began in 2004, is still within its initial stage, it was possible to identify and elaborate on the environmental and social aspects of the Policy, namely: the social inclusion of family farmers; regional development; food security; influencing the carbon and energy balance of biodiesel; promoting sustainable agricultural practices and a diversity of feedstock. (c) 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:645 / 654
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Social sustainability of Brazilian biodiesel: The role of agricultural cooperatives
    Stattman, Sarah L.
    Mol, Arthur P. J.
    [J]. GEOFORUM, 2014, 54 : 282 - 294
  • [2] The methylic versus the ethylic route: considerations about the sustainability of Brazilian biodiesel production
    Alexandre Bevilacqua Leoneti
    Valquiria Aragão-Leoneti
    Simone Vasconcelos Ribeiro Galina
    Geciane Silveira Porto
    [J]. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 2017, 19 : 637 - 651
  • [3] The methylic versus the ethylic route: considerations about the sustainability of Brazilian biodiesel production
    Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua
    Aragao-Leoneti, Valquiria
    Ribeiro Galina, Simone Vasconcelos
    Porto, Geciane Silveira
    [J]. ENVIRONMENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY, 2017, 19 (02) : 637 - 651
  • [4] Transition to sustainability: Assessing the challenges of the Brazilian environmental agenda and policy
    Duarte, Roberto Gonzalez
    Ferreira-Quilice, Thiago
    de Assis, Nilson Rodrigues
    Machado, Rafael Carvalho
    Oliveira, Rafael Santana Galva
    [J]. FOREST POLICY AND ECONOMICS, 2023, 157
  • [5] Technological, technical, economic, environmental, social, human health risk, toxicological and policy considerations of biodiesel production and use
    Zivkovic, Snezana B.
    Veljkovic, Milan V.
    Bankovic-Ilic, Ivana B.
    Krstic, Ivan M.
    Konstantinovic, Sandra S.
    Ilic, Slavica B.
    Avramovic, Jelena M.
    Stamenkovic, Olivera S.
    Veljkovic, Vlada B.
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2017, 79 : 222 - 247
  • [6] Environmental sustainability of biodiesel in Brazil
    Castanheira, Erica Geraldes
    Grisoli, Renata
    Freire, Fausto
    Pecora, Vanessa
    Coelho, Suani Teixeira
    [J]. ENERGY POLICY, 2014, 65 : 680 - 691
  • [7] Considerations on the Environmental and Social Sustainability of Animal-Based Policies
    Santeramo, Fabio Gaetano
    Lamonaca, Emilia
    Tappi, Marco
    Di Gioia, Leonardo
    [J]. SUSTAINABILITY, 2019, 11 (08):
  • [8] Sustainability policy and environmental policy
    Pezzey, JCV
    [J]. SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS, 2004, 106 (02): : 339 - 359
  • [9] THE SOCIAL COST OF SUSTAINABILITY - DISTRIBUTION AND EQUITY IN ENVIRONMENTAL-POLICY
    LEITH, B
    [J]. ALTERNATIVES-PERSPECTIVES ON SOCIETY TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENT, 1995, 21 (01): : 18 - 24
  • [10] Challenges in biodiesel industry with regards to feedstock, environmental, social and sustainability issues: A critical review
    Anuar, Mohd Razealy
    Abdullah, Ahmad Zuhairi
    [J]. RENEWABLE & SUSTAINABLE ENERGY REVIEWS, 2016, 58 : 208 - 223