Sustainability Issues in Biomass Feedstock Production: A Policy Perspective - Engineering and Science of Biomass Feedstock Production and Provision - page 241

will be able to provide in the future, particularly for biomass where capacity is
almost nonexistent. Moreover, unlike the EU FAS, NRCS services are limited to
environmental issues, so producers must seek out occupational health and safety
information separately through CREES and the federal Department of Labor's
Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA).
The RED does not impose sustainability criteria on renewable sources used for
electricity, heating, and cooling. Instead, it required the Commission to report on a
similar scheme for these uses [ 59 ]. In its report issued in February 2011, the
Commission recommends member states introduce sustainability schemes [ 74 ],
although concurrently the Commission initiated a consultation based on “new
developments” in the industry and policies to determine whether a need exists for
additional measures at the EU level [ 75 ]. In its July 2011 fi ndings, the Commission
notes that 72 % of respondents “believed that additional measures at [the] EU level
are needed to ensure the sustainability of biomass used in electricity and heating/
cooling sectors” [ 76 ]. The respondents' reasoning was based on (1) increasing EU
demand, (2) inadequate existing sustainability policy frameworks in the EU, (3) the
need for a consistent approach, and (4) the lack of a binding EU sustainability
scheme. The EU is currently considering existing forest sustainability laws and
whether amendments to the RED are necessary.

9.2.3 Brazil

Brazil's federal requirement for mandatory blending of sugar cane ethanol, Proalcool
program [ 77 ], does not contain practice-specifi c sustainability requirements.
However, in response to international pressure to prevent deforestation resulting
from energy biomass cropping, Brazil has codifi ed an agroecological zoning plan
for the expansion of its sugar cane-to-ethanol industry (ZAE-CANA) [ 78 ]. The
multiagency federal effort used soil, climate, hydrological, biological, socioeco-
nomic, and regulatory criteria to designate where cropping can occur. It automati-
cally excluded areas of native vegetation and areas of high biodiversity, such as the
Amazon and Pantanal, and focused on ensuring that land designation would support
sustainability and protection of biodiversity and would reduce competition with
food cropping. States must incorporate these land-use designations into their legal
regimes permitting expansion of sugar cane cropping [ 79 ].
The Forest Code is the second key law related to constraining land-use change
[ 80 ]. The Forest Code divides land categories into those for agricultural production
and conservation. Conservation is further subdivided into “permanent preservation
areas” (APPs) and “legal reservation areas” (RL). APPs must be established in areas
next to drinking water sources and rivers and sloped lands. The RL requires between
20 and 80 % of land owned to be maintained in forest or native vegetation, depend-
ing on the location of the farm. These conservation provisions are controversial
among private landowners. The Brazilian federal Congress approved a new version
of the Forest Code in 2011, which kept the RL and APPs in place but at a reduced