A technician from Chaco, from Presidencia Roque Sáenz Peña, working for a textile company in this province, managed to calculate the carbon footprint. He established that to produce 1 ton of fiber, 1,004 kilos of Carbon Dioxide were emitted. This determines that we have almost 300% less carbon emission here than the United States in cotton fiber production.

"When the agricultural sector is blamed for all of global warming, it's clear that in the process we only participate with less than ten percent, with the commerce sector being responsible for the highest emission," said engineer Miguel Kolar, responsible for a study aimed at determining the carbon emission of cotton activity.

"What we consider is cotton production in the field and the industrialization for obtaining fiber, which is the work done by the gins, and we must recognize that it is the only crop that has the first industrial stage in the area," indicated the professional from Sáenz Peña.

The measurement of carbon footprints in cotton crops is a work that has been carried out for three seasons and exposes the efficiency of Argentine producers' work, now also needing to work on the necessary tools for compensation.

The experience, led by agronomist engineer Miguel Kolar, who does it for the company he works for, owned by the Linke brothers, measures the carbon footprint emission in cotton fiber production. The fourth measurement period in 2022-2023 was cut short due to the impossibility of sowing due to lack of moisture.

"What we consider is cotton production in the field and the industrialization for obtaining fiber, which is the work done by the gins, and we must recognize that it is the only crop that has the first industrial stage in the area," indicated the professional from Sáenz Peña to the Agroperfiles Radio program broadcast on FM Universidad Uncaus.

The measurements to calculate the carbon footprint were based on the international standard ISO 14.067, which indicates how to measure the carbon footprint emission of a specific product, in this case, cotton fiber. The work was carried out in conjunction with engineer Rodolfo Bongiovanni, a specialist in the subject and professional from Inta Experimental Station Manfredi, in the province of Córdoba, and engineer Leticia Tuninetti from INTI Córdoba. "In any production process, there is emission, and what we do is measure that emission, which is the negative part of the process, but you need to know it to be able to compensate," Kolar summarized.

PRODUCTIVE COMPARISONS

The objective of the proposal is "to compare with what happens in the world." The Argentine agricultural producer "is one of the most efficient in the use of resources," using a lot of technology to counteract all the inconveniences that arise from adverse State policies. "That efficiency means we emit less carbon dioxide," Kolar pointed out.

In the specific experience with cotton in the Linke company's plantings, "one thousand and four grams were measured for each kilogram of fiber." "The Inta de Manfredi professional involved in the project measured for all production situations in the country, in the different productive scenarios, one thousand nine hundred grams per kilo of fiber," mentioned Miguel Kolar, who is part of the Linke team.

HOW MUCH THE US EMITS

In the global comparison, "in the United States, an average of two kilos nine hundred grams is emitted on average, in Brazil where there are no published studies, it is estimated that more than four kilos equivalent of carbon dioxide are emitted for each kilo of fiber." "In the specific case of the Levi's company, carbon footprints were measured in the complete production cycle and the life cycle of the 501 model jeans, that is, it was analyzed from when the cotton was sown until the pants were finished being used, including washing processes, determining that thirty-four kilos with six hundred grams of carbon dioxide are spent, with only two kilos nine hundred grams corresponding to the fiber," he exemplified.

The conclusion made by the Chaco professional is "that, when the agricultural sector is blamed for all of global warming, it's clear that in the process we only participate with less than ten percent, with the commerce sector being responsible for the highest emission."

It should be clarified that there are several greenhouse gases, with carbon dioxide being the most common, "but there are also methane, nitrous oxide, and others that are related to production processes and have their corresponding measurement tables."

BILLABLE BONDS

The carbon bond "is when it is captured or when it stops being emitted." It is captured, for example, by planting a forest, as the Iifa's afforestation plans do, "so the carob trees grow and the wood fixes carbon dioxide."

"That is an example of capture, it would be a productive system where the balance is positive and carbon capture can be measured, certified, and sold," explained engineer Miguel Kolar. A carbon bond is equivalent to a thousand kilos of carbon dioxide.

"The forest if we don't use it won't save us"

"On average, eighty-five percent of the oxygen we breathe is produced by the Ocean," stated engineer Miguel Kolar, countering claims that attribute this responsibility to forests. "In the process of photosynthesis of plants and bacteria, carbon dioxide, solar energy, and water are taken to generate a chemical process that releases oxygen, but for that to happen, glucose must be produced, which translates into biomass," he detailed.

"The stabilized, natural forest doesn't grow infinitely, and if it doesn't grow, there's no biomass production, and if there's no biomass production, there's no oxygen generation," he indicated, clarifying that "we're not saying to deforest everything, because the forest also provides other ecosystem services."

"The reality is that a stabilized forest, with mature trees, in the natural process between what it sheds and the regrowth, there's a balance between what it fixes and what it emits, which gives an average of practically zero," he mentioned.

The question is what happens if you enter that forest and remove the wood from mature trees, and the answer indicates that "it will give way to renewal with young species that will be able to grow and, consequently, fix."

"The worst thing is to avoid making charcoal"

The professional also mentions that "burning wood is renewable, which can generate a carbon bond by avoiding burning fossil fuel." "The worst thing we can do is prevent foresters from making charcoal because these people are preventing gas or diesel from being burned," he stated, also warning that "if the forest is not allowed to renew, it doesn't generate oxygen."

"The solution is to stop burning fossil fuels and start using wood but in a rational way, not exploiting the entire forest and with regulation, without prohibiting, because trees don't generate oxygen for us, but we can't indiscriminately cut down the forest to plant soybeans or cotton and emit," highlighted Miguel Kolar.

"Prohibiting deforestation is not the solution, allowing it is worse, it's necessary to work on the forest because if we don't touch it, if we don't use it, it won't save us either," he concluded.

Source: Agrositio