World biofuel-markets-conference-amsterdam-sustainability-peter-vissers-march-2010

Project partners:

Project ‘Towards sustainability certification of

Agro Pecuária de Manica Lda

Project Towards sustainability certification of Jatropha bio-fuels in Mozambique’: first resultsMatthias Spöttle Jatropha Alliance project managerMatthias Spöttle – Jatropha Alliance, project managerPeter Vissers – Partners for Innovation BV, senior partner World Biofuels Markets Congres, Jatropha Focus Panel, 17 March 2010, Amsterdam

Global Sustainable Biomass Fund Project © Jatropha Alliance & Partners for Innovation 2010 1

Project co-financed by:

I will not be talking aboutHow beautiful Jatropha trees and fruits are


I will not be talking about How much money Jatropha business is/will be making


I will not be talking about Biofuel vs food or biofuel vs nature discussions


I will not be talking about International and national biofuel politics


I will be talking about Making progress at business level with sustainability

Project ‘Towards sustainability certification of Jatropha bio-fuels in Mozambique’

Project objective To build up knowledge for future certification of Jatropha bio-

fuels through a benchmark pilot sustainability assessment fuels through a benchmark pilot sustainability assessment, using existing sustainability criteria frameworks

Ti liTimeline: 1 Oct 2009 – 30 Sept 2010


Why this project?

Fulfilling sustainability criteria has become a market requirement for biofuels

Reasons for the project:

b o ue s Jatropha industry has little experience with sustainability standards

Reasons for Mozambique as the country of choice: Advanced government policy on biofuels Existing cooperation with 3 Jatropha Alliance members having

operations in Mozambique

easo s o o a b que as t e cou t y o c o ce

operations in Mozambique Suitability of Mozambican situation, soils, climate, population

density, availability of unused cultivable land >


to grow Jatropha

Why this project? Moving forward on two pillars

A flourishing Jatropha business and sector

A thorough and positive business

This project isabout movingforward on the sustainability

illp

case:- Evidence of

success- Agronomic

Thorough resultson sustainability:

- People

pillar

gresearch and

support - Market

development

p- Planet- Profit

Global Sustainable Biomass Fund Project © Jatropha Alliance & Partners for Innovation 2010

p- …

8

What is the approach and planning of the project?

1. Review sustainability standards + methodology XActivities Q4Q1Q2Q3

2. Regional embedding X X X X3. Data collection X4. Pilot sustainability assessments X4. Pilot sustainability assessments X5. Interaction with standard institutions X6. Dissemination within the Jatropha Industry X7 Project management X X X X7. Project management X X X X

Overall timeline: 1 Oct 2009 – 30 Sept 2010


Activity 1: Review sustainability standardsList of relevant standards – selection of standards

Agri / feedstock standards Biofuel / biomass standardsINT – BSI (sugarcane) DE – ISCC 11INT – Fair Trade 12 EU – RED FQD 5INT – FSC (wood) INT – Compete 10INT Gl b lGAP ( i) 12 INT RSB 16INT – GlobalGAP (agri) 12 INT – RSB 16INT – LEAF (agri) NL – NTA8080 11INT – RSB Jatropha 2 UK – RTFO 16INT – RSB Jatropha 2 UK – RTFO 16INT – RSPO (palm oil)INT – RTRS (soy) >> We use RSB (and


( y) (INT – SAN / RA (agri) RTFO for GHG calculations)

Activity 1: Review sustainability standardsPrinciples of the RSB standard

P1: Legality P7: Conservation

P2: Planning, Monitoring P8: Soil g gand Continuous Improvement

P3: Greenhouse Gases P9: Water

P4: Human and Labor Rights P10: Air

P5: Rural and Local Development P11: Technology5 u a a d oca e e op e ec o ogy

P6: Food Security P12: Land Rights


Activity 1: Methodology developmentHow producers may use sustainability standards


Activity 1: Methodology development Questionnaires for pilot sustainability (self)-assessments


Activity 3: Data collectionCurrently 3 Jatropha growing plantations are involved

Company Province Location Actual size Target size Former Land Use(2010) (2015)

M1 Elaion Africa Lda Sofala Dondo 65ha 65 ha Bush‐Savanna, charcoal productionproduction

M2 Sun Biofuels Mozambique SA

Manica Chimoio 2,000 ha 10,000 ha Tobacco

M3 Agro Pecuaria de Manica Gondola 40ha 40 ha Farm land, probably Manica Lda Portuguese


Activity 4: Pilot sustainability assessmentExample of outcome summary of assessments

Example - tentative outcome summary of the sustainability assessment Site Site 1 Site 2 Site 3Company M1 Elaion M2 Sun M3 Agro

Principles (P) and criteria C - Testing framwork for sustainable biomass Location Dondo Chimoio GondolaP1 The greenhouse gas balance of the production chain and application of the biomass must be positive.C1.1 The emission reduction of greenhouse gases amounts to at least 30% for biofuels 1.00 1.00 1.00P2 Biomass production must not be at the expense of important carbon sinks in the vegetation and in the soil.C2.1 Conservation of above-ground (vegetation) carbon sinks when biomass units are installed. 0.50 0.25 0.25C2.2 Conservation of underground (soil) carbon sinks when biomass units are installed. 0.50 0.50 0.75P3 Th d ti f bi f t t d th f d l d l l bi li ti ( l di i b ildi t i l )P3 The production of biomass for energy must not endanger the food supply and local biomass applications (energy supply, medicines, building materials).C3.1 Insight into the change of land use in the region of the biomass production unit 1.00 0.75 0.75C3.2 Insight into the change of prices of food and land in the area of the biomass production unit 0.25 0.25 0.25P4 Biomass production must not affect protected or vulnerable biodiversity and will, where possible, have to strengthen biodiversity.C4.1 No violation of national laws and regulations that are applicable to biomass production and the production area. 0.00 0.75 0.75C4.2 In new or recent developments, no deterioration of biodiversity by biomass production in protected areas. 0.25 0.25 0.25C4.3 In new or recent developments, no deterioration of biodiversity in other areas with high biodiversity value, vulnerability or high agrarian, 0.25 0.25 0.25C4.4 In new or recent developments, maintenance or recovery of biodiversity within biomass production units 0.25 0.25 0.25C4.5 Strengthening of biodiversity where this is possible, during development and by the management of existing production units 0.25 0.25 0.25g g y p g p y g g pP5 In the production and processing of biomass the soil and the soil quality are retained or improved.C5.1 No violation of national laws and regulations that are applicable to soil management. 0.75 0.50 0.75C5.2 Best practices must be applied to retain or improve the soil and soil quality. 0.75 0.75 0.75C5.3 The use of residual products must not be at variance with other local functions for the conservation of the soil. 0.50 0.50 0.50P6 In the production and processing of biomass ground and surface water must not be depleted and the water quality must be maintained or improved.C6.1 No violation of national laws and regulations that are applicable to water management. 0.00 0.00 1.00C6.2 Best practices must be applied to restrict the use of water and to retain or improve ground and surface water quality. 1.00 1.00 1.00C6.3 No use must be made of water from non-renewable sources. 0.00 1.00 1.00P7 In the production and processing of biomass the air quality must be maintained or improvedP7 In the production and processing of biomass the air quality must be maintained or improved.C7.1 No violation of national laws and regulations that are applicable to emissions and air quality. 0.00 0.00 1.00C7.2 Best practices must be applied to reduce emissions and air pollution. 0.75 0.75 0.75C7.3 No burning as part of the installation or management of biomass production units (BPUs). 0.50 0.75 0.75P8 The production of biomass must contribute towards local prosperity.C8.1 Positive contribution of private company activities towards the local economy and activities. 0.00 0.50 0.75P9 The production of biomass must contribute towards the social well-being of the employees and the local population.C9.1 No negative effects on the working conditions of employees. 0.75 0.50 0.75C9.2 No negative effects on human rights 0.75 0.75 0.75


g gC9.3 The use of land must not lead to the violation of official property and use, and customary law without the free and prior consent of the s 1.00 0.75 1.00C9.4 Positive contribution to the well-being of local population 0.75 0.50 1.00C9.5 Insight into possible violations of the integrity of the company 0.00 0.25 0.25Total number of criteria with a score > 0.5 10 10 17

Scale: [0] = no compliance or data absent > [1] full compliance

Activity 2: Regional embeddingInvolvement and consultation of stakeholders

Mozambican Ministries of Agriculture, Energy, and EnvironmentContinuously informed:

Selected standard organisations: RSB, RTFO Other stakeholders: CEPAGRI, WWF, Petromoc

Mozambican Biofuel Policy working groupand Stakeholder Council on AgrofuelsGTZ/ProBecGTZ/ProBecDutch Embassy, University of Wageningen, Agency NL/SenterNovem


Activity 4: Pilot sustainability assessment Preliminary outcomes (1/4)


P2: Planning, Monitoring P8: Soil P3 P4 P5 P6 P8 P9

P10g gand Continuous Improvement


No major problemsin first checking.

However, providing

P4: Human and Labour Rights P10: Air

P5: Rural and Local Development P11: Technology

However, providingadequate

documentaryevidence is not

easy.5 u a a d oca e e op e ec o ogy


easy.




P2: Planning, Monitoring P8: Soil P1

Compliance checkg gand Continuous Improvement


Compliance check ongoing + check on company’s systems

to ensurecompliance.

P4: Human and Labor Rights P10: Air


compliance.

Challengingbecause of broad

field covered5 u a a d oca e e op e ec o ogy


field covered




P2: Planning, Monitoring P8: Soil

P2

Companies complyith M bi

g gand Continuous Improvement


with MozambicanESIA and land right

acquisition laws.

B t RSB iP4: Human and Labor Rights P10: Air


But: RSB requiresmore.

Further checkingi5 u a a d oca e e op e ec o ogy

P6: Food Security P12: Land Rights ongoing




P2: Planning, Monitoring P8: Soil

P7Were conservation values identified?g g

and Continuous Improvement

P3: Greenhouse Gases P9: WaterP11

Emphasis on safeuse of fertilisers

d ti idP4: Human and Labor Rights P10: Air


and pesticides

P12Check on DUAT 5 u a a d oca e e op e ec o ogy

P6: Food Security P12: Land Rights process


Next steps

1. March: peer review of draft activity 1 report before publication2. March: invitation to all Mozambican Jatropha businesses to join project3 March / April: data collection + building up of knowledge with the 3. March / April: data collection + building up of knowledge with the

3 companies involved4. May: accept invitation MOZ government to join national workgroup on

bi f l it ibiofuel criteria5. May: participation Maputo biofuel conference + continued regional

embeddingg6. May / June: pilot sustainability assessments of the 3 companies

+ workshop lessons learned with 3 companies +++?7 July / August / September: dissemination of results


7. July / August / September: dissemination of results8. Overall: develop add projects to support Jatropha industry

Thanks !

J t h AlliJatropha AllianceMatthias SpöttleProject Managerc/o GEXSI, Am Festungsgraben 1D-10117 Berlin GermanyD 10117 Berlin, GermanyPhone: +49 (30) 4000 4764-0Mail: [email protected] www.jatropha-alliance.org

Partners for Innovation BVPartners for Innovation BVPeter VissersSenior PartnerCruquiusweg 20 NL-1019 AT Amsterdam, The Netherlands+32 (80) 511 955 (home office)[email protected]


(A team at the Sun Biofuels plantation, having finised their day)

Business

World biofuel-markets-conference-amsterdam-sustainability-peter-vissers-march-2010