1

4oC+: A DRASTIC REDUCTION IN THE

RENEWABLE ENERGY POTENTIAL OF THE

SUGARCANESUGARCANE

Rasack NayamuthHead, Plant Physiology Department, MSIRI

Scientific and Technical Coordinator, SNC Mauritius

4 degrees and beyondInternational Climate Conference

28-30 September 2009, Oxford, UK

Location of Mauritius

MAURITIUS

2

Total Area 186 500 ha

Sugarcane 68 500 ha

Sugarcane in Mauritius

Contribution to GDP

Employment

Energy production

Land conservation

Contribution to GDP 2007

Total 2.2%

Agriculture 46%

Land Occupancy in Mauritius

Abandoned cane fields

3%

Sugar cane 38%

Roads

Built-up areas 25%

Other agriculture

5%

Forest & grazing lands

25%

Water bodies2%

2%

3

Electricity generation mix - 2007

CEB Hydro4%

CEB Thermal40%

IPP Bagasse16%

IPP Coal40%

CEB Kerosene0.1%

Electricity from Sugarcane in Mauritius

350 30

150

200

250

300

GW

H

10

15

20

25

mes

tic C

onsu

mpt

ion

Electricity exported

0

50

100

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

0

5

% o

f Dom

4

GHG Avoided by Sugarcane Biomass

600000

700000Heavy oil Coal

eq)

200000

300000

400000

500000

GH

G E

mis

sion

(t C

O2-

e

0

100000

200000

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

G

Impact Climate variability on Cane Productivity

90TCH

60

70

80

40

50

1997 1998 2001 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 1999 1994 2002

NORMAL YEARS DROUGHT CYCLONIC

5

y = 0 013x + 1 208

29

2.1.1 Regression of average yearly maximum temperatureIsland

(oC)

y = 0.013x + 1.208R2 = 0.200

27

28

25

26

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Increase 0.13 oC / 10 yr

22

2.2.1 Regression of average yearly minimum tempIsland

(oC)

y = 0.026x - 31.085R2 = 0.482

20

21

18

19

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010

Increase 0.26 oC / 10 yr

6

4000

1.1 Regression of annual rainfall over the island

(mm)

y = -5.17x + 12178R2 0 1

2000

3000

R2 = 0.1

0

1000

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Decrease 52 mm / 10 yr

Period 1961 - 1990 Period 1971 - 2000

MEAN ANNUAL RAINFALL (mm/yr)

600 - 800

801 - 1000

1001 - 1500

1501 - 2500

2501 30002501 - 3000

3001 - 4000

7

Annual rainfall at Pamplemousses

YEAR1

61 - 702015

71 - 801337

81 - 901324

91 - 00868

2345678

1708132114631662123818011532

1982127710491285158013641307

22331061989

175312022322988

10851298829

14971095117612398

910

MEAN

153215281601

1587

130718992407

1549

9881334816

1402

1239711

1237

1103

9

10

T.CycloneLinear (T.Cyclone)

Increase of intense tropical cyclone

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Num

ber o

f tro

pica

l Cyc

lone

( y )5 per. Mov. Avg. (T.Cyclone)

0

1

2

1975

-76

1977

-78

1979

-80

1981

-82

1983

-84

1985

-86

1987

-88

1989

-90

1991

-92

1993

-94

1995

-96

1997

-98

1999

-00

2001

-02

2003

-04

2005

-06

2007

-08

Cyclone Season

8

SIMULATED CLIMATE CHANGES FOR MAURITIUS

Precipitationratio (mm)

TemperatureIncrease (°C)

Solar Radiationratio (W m-2)

Doublimg of CO2 level (760 ppm)

ratio (mm)Increase ( C) ratio (W m )

1.021.193.59GISS

1.061.032.68GFDL

1.000.872.12UKMO

0 981 092 42CCCM 0.981.092.42CCCM

• Incremental scenariosArbitrary changes of +2 and 4°C with +/- 10 and 20% rainfall

Validation of APSIM-Sugarcane Model Biomass accumulation

80 80 M 13/56R 570

20

30

40

50

60

70

Bio

mas

s D

W (t

ha-1

)

20

30

40

50

60

70

Bio

mas

s D

W (t

ha-1

)

0

10

20

0

10

20B

PC 1RPC 1R

ObservedSimulated

9

Impacts on sugarcane productionGCMs scenarios

( /t )Cane yield WUE

(mm/t crop)t/ha

70.8

55.7

52.3

55 4

Baseline

CCCM

GFDL

GISS

-21

-26

-22

10.5

14.2

15.3

15 3

% Change

41.2

55.4GISS

UKMO -42

-22

17.2

15.3

Singh and Maayar – Trinidad -18 to - 42 %

Impacts on sugarcane productionIncremental scenarios

Cane yield WUE(mm/t crop)t/ha

53.6+20% RR & + 4oC -24 16.0

% Change

47.3+10% RR & + 4oC -33 12.8

40 60% RR & + 4oC 43 14 1

70.8Baseline 10.5

33.7-10% RR & + 4oC -52 15.2

27.2-20% RR & + 4oC -62 17.2

40.60% RR & + 4 C -43 14.1

10

Recent Climate Change Projections

• MAGICC-SCENGEN v5.3 (9 best GCMs)

2020

Time

2030

Precipitation

-5.41

-7.02

Change (%)Temperature Change (oC)

0.37

0.56

Mean

0.43

0.64

Min

0.59

0.87

MaxHorizon

205020802100

-11.09

-20.41

-22.44

1.15

2.06

2.89

1.00

1.78

2.50

1.57

2.80

3.95

Adaptation options evaluated

Irrigationg

Alternate varieties

Alternative harvest dates

11

IRRIGATION IMPACT

(mm/t crop)t/haCane yield WUE

112

117

132

120

Baseline

CCCM

GFDL

GISS

7.8

8.7

8.4

9.3

121UKMO 8.4

115 9.7Incremental, +4oC

Fresh water abstractions by source

ReservoirsGround water

Reservoirs23%

18%

Rivers & streams

59%

12

Water utilisation

Domestic Industrial &

Tourism32%

Industrial private boreholesAgriculture boreholes

1%Agriculture

67%

About 40% used for Hydropower

Impact on GHG emissions

ScenarioBagasse production

GHG * emissions

Best case

Worst case

Scenario production emissions

-270 655 t 129 599 t CO2-eq

-813 813 t 388 797 t CO2-eq2 q

* Emissions resulting from coal burning

13

Stalk

JuiceRaw and

special sugars

Possibilities for enhancing mitigation potential of sugarcane in Mauritius

Stalk

Cane topsleaves trash

Fibre (bagasse)

Left in fields

SteamElectricity

Molasses

Filter cake & furnace ash

75% Exported

To fields

MAURITIUSProject area

Pamplemousses

La Nicoliere001000

Rainfed cane

Irrigated cane

ROUGH ESTIMATES OF ADAPTATION COSTS USD - 2009 PRICES

Midlands Dam

La Nicoliere

3500

1500

20002500

3000

10

Project area

Isohyet

Surface water storage

Additional water 423 Mm3

USD 730M

Irrigation network

TOTAL ESTIMATES

% GDP

USD 270M

USD 1 billion

13% GDP GROWTH 5%

14

Conclusions

Sugarcane industry highly vulnerable to CCAdaptation impossible because of

Increased water demandHigh costs of irrigation networkHigh costs of water storageLess water from reduced rainfall

4oC beyond adaptation limit

4oC = GHG emissions = Further GLOBAL WARMING

4oC = Reduced production

Global impacts of +4 degrees

MAURITIUS

Source : http://www.sugarcanecrops.com

15

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

• The National Meteorological Services forproviding the long-term met data for the study

• Environmental Change Institute for their supportto attend and present this work