85
Integrating Sector-Wide Reforms for Mitigation
Box 3.1 Rail Companies: Energy Consumers but also Electricity Producers (continued) Figure B.3.1 Energy Production Trends in Japanese Railways Trends in total CO2 emissions (Million tCO2)
3.12 3
2.82
0.38 2.63 0.21
2.41
0.22
1.16
2 2.76
1.13
1.14
2.58 2.39
1
2.20
1.63
(20% reduction)
1.05
0
1.44 1.29
1991 Base value 2004 Other fuels
(7% reduction)
(13% reduction)
2005
Change in calculation method
0.22
1.11
2.35 0.21
2.34 0.22
1.22
1.10
0.92
2006
Purchased electricity
2007
JR East own electricity
1.20 2.26
2.12
2.13 (23% reduction)
2.53 0.20
1.02
(23% reduction)
2008
(18% reduction)
1.88 (32% reduction)
1.38 (50% reduction)
1.13
2009
2018 2031 (fiscal) Target value Target value Equivalent to JR East energy consumption
Source: JR East 2009. http://www.jreast.co.jp/e/environment/pdf_2009/p26_31.pdf. Note: CO2 = carbon dioxide.
Promise and Challenges of Biofuels Biofuels could complement the modest technological advances in internal combustion engines. Ethanol is produced from food crops, such as sugarcane and maize, and biodiesel can be made from vegetable oil and animal fat. Both have the potential to lower hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions. They are also sulfur-free. Higher octane biofuels allow ethanol-fueled vehicles to run on engines with a higher compression ratio, increasing engine efficiency. However, the energy intensity of these first-generation biofuels may not be superior to pure gasoline. Ethanol contains about 33 percent less energy than gasoline and biodiesel up to 10 percent less. Total fuel economy, therefore, is expected to improve only a few percentage points (Kojima and Johnson 2005). Second, if accounting for lifecycle emissions, net emission savings from ethanol may not be large. Estimates differ substantially because of different assumptions and feedstock used (Croezen and others 2010). In Brazil the savings could reach about 90 percent, including fertilizer production and fuel manufacturing (Macedo and others 2004). But in general estimated CO2 emission savings range from 6 to 28 percent when indirect land use change is taken into account (Croezen and others 2010). This would include the cost of expansion to new land for crops that were on land diverted to biofuel crops (Searchinger 2009). Turning the Right Corner • http://dx.doi.org/10.1596/978-0-8213-9835-7