U.S. SCIENTISTS VISIT BRAZIL FOR MOU ON BIOFUELS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 05 SAO PAULO 000314 SIPDIS SENSITIVE STATE FOR WHA/BSC, WHA/EPSC FOR FCORNEILLE, E FOR GMANUEL, EEB/ESC/IEC FOR BHAENDLER STATE PASS USTR FOR KDUCKWORTH STATE PASS DOE/NREL FOR HCHUM DEPT OF TREASURY FOR JHOEK, BONEILL DEPT OF ENERGY FOR AMIRANDA, GWARD, CGILLESPIE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ENRG EAGR ECON EINV TRGY BR SUBJECT: U.S. SCIENTISTS VISIT BRAZIL FOR MOU ON BIOFUELS REF: BRASILIA 0126; BRASILIA 097; 07 BRASILIA 1826; 07 BRASILIA 905. SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED--PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY Summary -------------- ¶1. (SBU) As part of the U.S.-Brazil Memorandum of Understanding to Advance Cooperation on Biofuels, a U.S. delegation of eight scientists and engineers from the Departments of Energy and Agriculture visited Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro states from May 30 to June 6. Their visit follows a similar one by a delegation of Brazilian scientists to U.S. renewable energy laboratories in September 2007. The U.S. delegation accomplished its mission to get a greater appreciation for Brazilian research and development in biofuels and use lessons learned to promote U.S.-Brazil collaboration on advanced biofuels research, particularly on cellulosic ethanol production. The group explored several areas for joint cooperation including the possibility of sharing biomass samples to unify bilateral research opportunities and facilitating scientific exchanges to strengthen Brazilian analytical methodologies. ¶2. (SBU) Despite the opportunities for joint research collaboration, the U.S. delegation also witnessed several short-term challenges to furthering our bilateral relationship on biofuels. In particular these challenges include the high costs of financing research and development in Brazil, an industry focus on producing bioelectricity which would reduce feedstocks for cellulosic ethanol production, and the persistent view by Brazilian industry that consistent efficiencies in production utilizing existing technologies will continue. Even with these challenges, both sides agreed to work on the joint challenge of getting a positive biofuels message out via better education about the advantages of biofuels. The U.S. delegation appeared satisfied with their visit to Brazil and left with several tools to tackle the challenges and opportunities ahead. End Summary. Visiting University Laboratories -------------- ¶3. (U) The U.S. delegation visited several of Brazil's top research universities that have been studying biofuels since Brazil's ethanol program began in the 1970s. Brazil's largest university, the University of Sao Paulo (USP),is widely viewed as among Brazil's best universities. Professors from the Polytechnic Department outlined the four major research areas in Brazil: pre-treatment of bagasse (USP-Lorena campus),enzyme production (UFRJ, USP, Goiania), fermentation (USP-Lorena and UFRJ),and the energy balance for new mills (UNICAMP/NIPE). The USP professors told the U.S. delegation they need more collaboration on enzyme production and protein engineering of enzymes. The U.S. side suggested sharing biomass pretreated samples would be a good way to collaborate on research and corroborate results. The group also suggested an exchange of doctoral candidates or post-doctorate researchers with advanced training in analytical techniques to a U.S. laboratory to collaborate on methodology and learn U.S. methodology. Likewise, at the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ),the U.S. delegation met with professors from the Chemistry Department and toured some biofuels research laboratories. They discussed the University's chemical and microbiological research on biofuels, and similarly raised the issue of sharing bagasse and lignin cake samples as a way to collaborate on research. ¶4. (U) The U.S. delegation met with University of Campinas (UNICAMP) professor Marcelo Mendessi, who runs the Agency for Innovation (INOVA). UNICAMP is one of the few Brazilian examples of university collaboration with the private sector. Mendessi explained that INOVA's role is to encourage technology transfer of developing technologies by facilitating the patent and development processes. Although UNICAMP is Brazil's largest patent holder, the SAO PAULO 00000314 002 OF 005 number it holds is about the same as research universities outside Brazil. Mendessi explained to the U.S. delegation the lack of private sector innovation and the low preponderance of Brazilian companies seeking patents. Government Sponsored Research -------------- ¶5. (U) The U.S. delegation toured Sao Paulo state's Institute of Technological Research (IPT),a think tank primarily focused on biomass gasification for syngas generation. IPT has received significant research funding for biofuels development. According to IPT researchers, 30 percent of funding is from the Sao Paulo state government and 70 percent from research and service contracts. Investment for this year is 20 times greater than last year because of Petrobras' increased investment into biomass research, specifically on gasification plants. Both sides pointed to the challenges of harmonizing research when performed on different substrates; despite many commonalities neither side could corroborate the other's research without sharing substrate samples. One area of possible collaboration discussed with IPT was cellulosic conversion of sugarcane "trash" (leaves and stalks) to ethanol. The U.S. delegation pointed to American analytical methods for other feedstocks that could serve as a model. As with USP professors, both sides agreed there is a need for more training for Brazilian researchers in analytical methods. The U.S. delegation suggested encouraging exchanges to U.S. research centers for the period of one year or more to improve and collaborate on analytical methodologies. IPT Chief Operating Officer Marcos Tadeu Pereira noted that IPT has funding for this type of exchange to pay expenses for professionals with five to 10 years of experience. ¶6. (U) The National Laboratory for Synchrotron Light Technology (LNLS) outlined for the U.S. delegation its proposed Center of Science and Technology of Bioethanol (CTBE). LNLS receives half of its budget from the Ministry of Science and Technology (MST),eight percent from private companies that pay fees to use its facilities (primarily Petrobras),and 42 percent from the Foundation of Research Assistance of Sao Paulo State (FAPESP). CTBE's Director, Marco Aurelio Pinheiro Lima, explained that the center would reach out to industry and would be fully dedicated to research into ethanol production from sugarcane. Their goal is to have 100 researchers on staff and another 100 associate researchers from other institutions. Pinheiro Lima told the U.S. delegation that CTBE's two projects would be on hydrolysis technology to convert bagasse and trash into ethanol and low-impact mechanization. Private Sector Research and Development -------------- ¶7. (U) Visits to two separate groups, the Center for Sugarcane Technology (CTC) and the joint operation of two Votorantim companies Canavialis and Alellyx, gave the U.S. delegation a somewhat different view of the short-term viability of second generation cellulosic ethanol production. Both groups genetically engineer sugarcane seedlings to produce higher yields and withstand disease and climate changes. Fernando Reinach, a General Partner for Votorantim New Business Ventures, explained that Canavialis produces 2.2 million seedlings each year and has one million hectares under management as part of its technology package management service, which is about 20 percent of Brazilian market share of sugarcane planted. They also have a project in Angola where they are reintroducing varieties to reestablish the Angolan sugarcane industry. ¶8. (SBU) Both explained that productivity gains in Brazil could reduce crop expansion needs. Reinach noted that genetically modified sugarcane enables Brazilian cane farmers to produce 80 percent more sucrose per hectare, which by itself would almost double production without increasing production areas. Similarly, William Burnquist from CTC said it has existing technology to increase production by 20 percent or more from 85 to 100 tons of SAO PAULO 00000314 003 OF 005 sugarcane per hectare without increasing hectares planted, but that many mills lack the necessary capital to invest in this technology. Burnquist told the U.S. delegation that CTC believes that the Brazilian ethanol industry has already reached sustainable productivity because productivity gains are up on average two percent per year over the last 65 years. Brazilian mills are crushing approximately 600 tons of cane per hour, double what they used to with using only half the energy. In their view, there is nothing to suggest that the productivity gains will not continue into the future. ¶9. (SBU) Both Votorantim and CTC voiced concern that the prospects for cellulosic ethanol development in Brazil in the near-term appeared limited. In Reinach's view, the opportunity cost of using bagasse for cellulosic ethanol instead of for producing electricity implies that sugar mills would face losses because electricity prices per megawatt in Brazil are greater than what they would gain by turning this bagasse into ethanol. He noted that Brazil's electricity demand would ultimately determine the use of trash and bagasse for this purpose, and that Brazil would likely buy cellulosic technology from the U.S. if producers opted to employ ethanol production via cellulosic transformation in the future. Reinach pointed out that electricity generation from bagasse is inexpensive and clean and that Brazil potentially has enough bagasse to provide for half of its electricity needs. (Note: Please see septel from Sao Paulo for more information on the bioelectricity sector as part of Mission Brazil's ongoing electricity series. End Note.) Burnquist expressed similar views, saying Brazil does not need second generation ethanol to meet its projection of 100 million liters of ethanol or to help supply ethanol to the U.S. under the new U.S. ethanol targets. He noted, however, that Brazil provided the easiest industrial situation to employ second generation technologies because Brazilian mills already have fully integrated biomass, fermentation, distillation, and waste management processes. ¶10. (U) In addition to on-going collaboration between CTC and USDA, the group discussed more possible joint projects including non-competitive engineering tools that could be used on all feedstocks and a larger-scale project to help mills reduce costs. ¶11. (SBU) The U.S. delegation also met with biofuels scientists from Petrobras' Research and Development Center (CENPES) in Rio de Janeiro and received a series of briefings on the energy company's research in areas such as biodiesel and lignocellulosic ethanol production. As Petrobras holds a monopoly on Brazil's ethanol pipeline system and distribution network, the group also discussed ongoing research on pipeline and transportation issues such as why U.S. pipelines, which transport corn-based ethanol, are showing signs of stress wear while Brazilian pipelines which transport sugarcane-based ethanol are not. The group also visited Petrobras' bagasse-to-ethanol pilot plant which was inaugurated in 2007. ¶12. (U) The U.S. delegation also met with Brazilian capital goods manufacturer Dedini, which manufactures 80 percent of all Brazilian ethanol distilleries and also supplies products across the entire ethanol/sugar production spectrum. Jose Luiz Oliverio, Dedini's Senior Technology and Development Vice President, told the delegation that Dedini has money to develop new technologies from FAPESP and is very interested in collaboration on gasification technologies. He noted that Dedini signed a confidentiality agreement with General Electric to develop gas turbines for gasification of vinasse. Despite Dedini's interest in developing equipment, however, Oliveiro pointed to the high cost of capital as the number one impediment in Brazil for technology development. ¶13. (SBU) John Melo, CEO of U.S. company Amyris, outlined its recently signed joint venture with two Brazilian companies to develop a business model to produce biodiesel and jet fuel. Amyris has been developing the technology since 2001 and the Gates Foundation put money behind the idea in 2004. Amyris chose to build its business in Brazil to tap into existing scale and business SAO PAULO 00000314 004 OF 005 know-how and because sugarcane is the cheapest feedstock. Melo projected that the first sugar mill would be converted and capable of producing diesel by June 2010 followed by a two year period of scale-up to full production. Melo said that Amyris estimated that it would cost USD 20 to 30 million to convert the mills to diesel production. ¶14. (SBU) The U.S. delegation also met with the Brazilian Sugarcane Industry Association (UNICA) to exchange views. With respect to the U.S.-Brazil MOU on biofuels, UNICA representatives noted that multiple certification systems are counterproductive and that UNICA is lobbying for one or two harmonized and transparent systems that cannot be used as veiled non-tariff barriers. UNICA's Chief Representative to the U.S. Joel Velasco noted that continued collaboration in forums such as the U.S. Interagency Biomass Board and working closely with DOE's Office of Biomass Program was needed to educate third parties on biofuels developments. Velasco advocated creating a more regular mechanism to communicate (perhaps a periodic conference call) to keep the flow of information constant. UNICA also suggested organizing a bi-national scientific convention after which the participants would release a public statement of their findings. UNICA criticized the scientific communities in both countries for its relative silence on biofuels issues. Bilateral Meeting with the GOB -------------- ¶15. (SBU) The U.S. delegation met with their Brazilian government counterparts the final day of the visit at the Consulate General in Sao Paulo. Minister Andre Correa do Lago, Director of the Energy Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs led the Brazilians, along with Adriano Duarte Filho, General Coordinator for Technological Sectors, Ministry of Science and Technology, Jose Monserrat Filho, Head of the Board for International Affairs, Ministry of Science and Technology, and Daniel Machado da Fonseca from the Division for New and Renewable Energy Resources, Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (Note: Fonseca accompanied the U.S. delegation throughout the visit. End Note.) ¶16. (SBU) Lago opened the meeting by commenting on the High-Level Conference on World Food Security in Rome which Lago reported that the U.S. and Brazil had worked together to "avoid damaging language on biofuels." Likewise, Lago referenced the upcoming meeting of the Global Bioenergy Partnership (GBEP) which was held in Rio de Janeiro on June 18 and 19 as another important opportunity to make the case for biofuels. Lago said that the scientific community needs to be more engaged in the food versus fuel debate and noted that the GOB is considering lobbying for a special scientific commission to write a report from the scientific perspective. He said that the GOB envisioned a multinational commission made up of Brazilians, Americans, Europeans, and others with a view to make the commission's findings as objective as possible. ¶17. (SBU) Regarding the MOU on Biofuels, Lago complemented the progress of the Standards Committee, but noted that a few details still needed to be worked out on ethanol standards and quite a bit more work on biodiesel. When questioned whether the Europeans had been constructively engaged in setting standards, Lago simply responded that "the Europeans are engaged" indicating that they had not always been constructive, but said that the Europeans had been cooperative on a technical level. ¶18. (SBU) Overall, members of the U.S. delegation told the Brazilians that they were impressed with the work Brazil has been doing on biofuels. The DOE's Amy Miranda suggested that DOE could team up with UNICA and others to showcase for third parties the latest developments in bioenergy. James McMillan from NREL said that Brazil still has huge untapped opportunities and highlighted Dedini's rapid hydrolysis technology (a process using hydrolysis to convert sugarcane bagasse into sugars that, fermented and distilled, result in ethyl alcohol) as one example. Joseph Rich from USDA said SAO PAULO 00000314 005 OF 005 that Brazil's infrastructure to support the biofuels business was impressive and that the U.S. could learn from the Brazilian expertise. Richard Bain, also from USDA, complemented the first generation integrated mills and agreed that the decision for mills to produce bioelectricity made sound economic sense. He suggested bioelectricity as an area for future collaboration, especially for sustainability issues. ¶19. (SBU) USDA's Edward Richard highlighted crop production technology for further collaboration, specifically to assess the value of sugarcane trash. Patricia Hu reflected on the lessons-learned in the area of transportation. She noted that the focus of her office is assessing the "demand problem" which exists right now in the U.S. Demand will determine eventual infrastructure investments along the supply chain, from feedstock to fuel station. She said her office is looking at the need for dedicated ethanol pipelines, as ethanol is causing cracking in the current pipelines. Comment -------------- ¶20. (SBU) Although the public rhetoric to separate Brazilian sugarcane-based ethanol from U.S. corn-based ethanol has divided the two governments in recent weeks, the technical visit as part of our MOU with Brazil was very successful. Both sides avoided the fuel versus food debate and tried to find common links for shared research on second generation cellulosic ethanol. Despite the interest among Brazilian researchers for sharing techniques and methodologies, the Brazilian private sector lacks the incentives for implementing cellulosic ethanol over the short and medium term. Without a tangible export demand for ethanol (and a proportional price increase),many sugarcane mills probably would chose to produce electricity with excess bagasse and trash instead of incorporating cellulosic ethanol production into existing mills. However, even given the lack of incentives and vagaries of demand, the U.S. delegation saw that Brazil could still be a perfect test laboratory for integrating cellulosic ethanol into its existing production system if the right set of incentives were in place. The challenge for furthering the MOU will be addressing these opportunity costs for Brazilian producers in such a way to drive mutual incentives for advancing cellulosic research. End Comment. ¶21. (U) This cable was written jointly with US Consulate Rio de Janeiro and coordinated and cleared with Embassy Brasilia. STORY