Feedstocks Final Report Vance Morey Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering Collaborators Gary Sands Nalladurai Kaliyan Dario Sanchez Bioproducts and Biosystems Engineering ID: 682179
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Development of Logistics Systems for Sus..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Development of Logistics Systems for Sustainable Supply of Herbaceous and Woody Feedstocks- Final Report -
Vance Morey
Bioproducts
and
Biosystems
Engineering
Collaborators:
Gary Sands,
Nalladurai
Kaliyan
, Dario Sanchez
Bioproducts
and
Biosystems
Engineering
Douglas Tiffany
Applied Economics
North Central Regional Sun Grant Center Annual Meeting
Bloomington, MN
March 18-19, 2015
Slide2
Project Support
DOT
Biobased
Transportation Research ProgramSlide3
IntroductionSustainable production of biofuels/bioenergy/bioproducts depends on the sustainability of biomass feedstock production and supply logistics system.A combination of herbaceous and woody crops may be needed to provide large amounts of feedstocks.
Users of biomass operate on an industrial cycle while biomass is produced on an agricultural cycle.
Need for development of supply logistics system to deliver biomass throughout the year to the users.
Need for a holistic analysis on economics, energy, environment, and sustainability factors for biomass logistics systems.Slide4
Project Objectives Develop supply logistics systems for corn stover, prairie grass (switchgrass), and short rotation willow.
Compare the logistical systems for three biomass
feedstocks
in terms of the following criteria:
Cost
(per ton of biomass and per unit of energy)
Fossil energy use
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
Change in soil organic carbon (SOC)
Nitrogen loss (surface, subsurface, and atmosphere losses)
Soil loss due to erosion
Disseminate project results to those in the biomass supply chain, and public agencies and policy makers.Slide5
Project Tasks forThree Biomass Feedstocks
Production system analysis
Sustainability (soil and water quality) indicators
Collection/harvest system analysis
Local storage system analysis
Pre-processing (bale to bulk processing) and transport system analysis
Logistics system integration and evaluations
Conduct outreach and extension activitiesSlide6
Systems for this ProjectCorn stover – include sustainability (soil and water quality) indicators
Corn
stover
with cover crop – include cover crop establishment and sustainability indicators
Switchgrass – include production and sustainability indicators
Willow – include production and sustainability indicators
US Midwest
C
orn grown on highly productive crop land
Switchgrass
and willow grown on less productive landSlide7
Corn Stover Logistics SystemSlide8
Agricultural to Industrial SystemAgricultural –
One harvest per year
Industrial
–
Requires supply
throughout the yearSlide9
Corn Stover SystemsItem
Bulk Product (Round Bales)
Rectangular Bales
Bale size
6 ft D x 5 ft L
(1.8 m D x
1.5 m L)
8 ft x 4 ft x 3 ft
(2.4 m x 1.2 m x 0.9 m)
Bale wrap
Net
wrap
Plastic twine
Bale density (
w.b
.)
9 lb/ft
3
(144 kg/m
3
)
13 lb/ft3 (208 kg/m3)Storage (near field)Outdoor (5% DML)Indoor (1% DML)Delivered product (truck)Roll press compacts, bulk density 15 lb/ft3 (240 kg/m3)Rectangular bales
Common Assumptions:
Corn yield (#2 yellow) – 200 bu./acre (12.6 Mg/ha)
Stover removal rate – 70% every other corn year
Stover yield – 3.31 dry ton/acre (7.4 dry Mg/ha)
Moisture content – 15% (
w.b
.)
Field to storage site – 2 mile (3.2 km) radius
Storage site to plant – 30 mile (48.3 km) radiusSlide10
Tub-Grinding/Roll-Press Compaction
Previous
SunGrant
Project
(2009 – 2012)Slide11
Roll Compacted Corn StoverSlide12
Corn Stover – Total Delivered CostLand rent – $0/acre
Moisture content – 15% (
w.b
.) Slide13
Corn Stover – Fossil Energy Consumption
Bulk Product (Round Bales) – 9.5% dry
stover
energy
Rectangular Bales – 5.8% dry
stover
energy
1127
Tub GrindingSlide14
Corn Stover – GHG EmissionsExcludes soil organic carbon (SOC) changeSlide15
Switchgrass Production and Logistics SystemSlide16
Switchgrass
http://sites.udel.edu/poultryextension/tag/switchgrass/
http://www.window.state.tx.us/txinnovator/ti-summer08/webex.html
http://www.geotimes.org/mar08/article.html?id=nn_switchgass.htmlSlide17
Switchgrass Production and Logistics System (10 year lifecycle)Sources:
Duffy (2008) – Iowa State University
Lazarus
(2010) – University of Minnesota
Khanna
and Huang (2010) – University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
Establishment
1-2 yrs (Marginal land)
Field preparation
Sowing (20% Reseeding)
Weed
control
Fertilizing
2
– 10 years
Harvesting /
Collection
2 – 10 yrs (4 ton DM/yr)
Field drying
Round bales, net-wrap
Local Field
Storage
Round bales, net-wrap
Pre-processing to
increase bulk density
Delivery to
Facility
Truck transport
Round bales
Roll compacted products
2 – 10 yearsSlide18
Switchgrass SystemsItem
Bulk Product (Round Bales)
Rectangular Bales
Bale size
6 ft D x 5 ft L
(1.8 m D x
1.5 m L)
8 ft x 4 ft x 3 ft
(2.4 m x 1.2 m x 0.9 m)
Bale wrap
Net
wrap
Plastic twine
Bale density (
w.b
.)
9 lb/ft
3
(144 kg/m
3
)
13 lb/ft3 (208 kg/m3)Storage (near field)Outdoor (5% DML)Indoor (1% DML)Delivered product (truck)Roll press compacts,bulk density 15 lb/ft3 (240 kg/m3)Rectangular bales
Common Assumptions:
Life span – 10 years
Yield (3 – 10 years) – 4.2 dry ton/acre/year (9.4 dry Mg/ha/year)
Harvest percent – 80% DM (harvest once after first frost)
Harvest yield – 2.9 dry ton/acre/year (6.5 dry Mg/ha/year)
Moisture content – 15% (
w.b
.)
Field to storage site – 2 mile (3.2 km) radius
Storage site to plant – 30 mile (48.3 km) radiusSlide19
Switchgrass – Total Delivered Cost
Land rent – $80/acre
Moisture content – 15% (
w.b
.) Slide20
Switchgrass –
Fossil Energy Consumption
Bulk Product (Round Bales) – 13.8% dry switchgrass energy
Rectangular Bales – 9.9% dry switchgrass energy
1718
Tub GrindingSlide21
Switchgrass – GHG EmissionsExcludes soil organic carbon (SOC) changeSlide22
Willow Production and Logistics SystemSlide23
http://images.nrel.govShort Rotation Willow
http://www.eereblogs.energy.gov/biomass/post/2013/01/28/Developing-Willow-Biomass-Reducing-the-Delivered-Cost-of-Feedstock.aspx
http://www.esf.edu/willow/Slide24
Willow Production and Logistics System (22 year lifecycle)
Establishment
1 year (Marginal land)
Nursery operations
Field preparation
Planting
Weed control
Coppice (Cutback)
Fertilizing
Spring
2, 5,
9, 13, 17
yr
Harvesting
Winter
(4 ton
DM/yr)
Cut and chip harvester
5, 9, 13
,
17, 21
yr
Willow Chips
Delivery to Facility
17 lb/ft
3
at 50% MC
Truck transport
Willow Stool
Elimination
22
yr, spring/summer
Weed control
Stock removal
Five 4-year
Rotations
Coppice Regrowth
Sources:
EcoWillow Model – State University of New York
Lazarus (2010) – University of Minnesota
Gonzalez-Garcia et al. (2012) – EU StudiesSlide25
Willow SystemItem
Willow
Chips
Life span
22 years
Rotation cycle
4 years, 5 rotations
Yield (per year)
4.0 dry ton/acre/year (9.0 dry Mg/ha/year)
Yield
(project life)
88.3 dry ton/acre (198 dry
Mg/ha)
Moisture content
50% (
w.b
.)
Storage (near field)
None
Distance from field to plant
30 mile (48.3 km) radius
Delivered product (truck)
Chips, bulk density 17 lb/ft
3
(272 kg/m
3
)Slide26
Willow – Total Delivered CostLand rent – $40/acre
Moisture content – 50% (
w.b
.) Slide27
Willow – Fossil Energy Consumption
Delivery of willow chips requires 3.3% of dry willow energySlide28
Willow – GHG Emissions
Excludes soil organic carbon (SOC) changeSlide29
Comparison of Total Delivered CostSlide30
Comparison of Fossil Energy Consumption
Tub Grinding
Tub GrindingSlide31
Comparison of GHG EmissionsExcludes soil organic carbon (SOC) changeSlide32
Sustainability with EPIC ModelEPIC (Environment Policy Integrated Climate)
Change
in soil organic carbon (SOC
),
Nitrogen
loss,
Soil loss due to
erosion
Corn
stover
without/with cover crop
Location – Waseca, MN; Peoria, IL (22 years – 1998 to 2010)
Yield (grain,
stover
)
Amount of residue removed
Tillage practice
Switchgrass
Location – Waseca, MN; Peoria, IL (22 years – 1998 to 2010)
Yield
Amount harvested Slide33
Corn Production Systems
Tillage Intensity
Spring
Fall
No tillage
No till/rye
cover crop
Kill
rye May 15
Plant rye Sept. 15
Reduced (medium) tillage
Row cultivator
Chisel plow
Conventional tillage
Row cultivator
Tandem
disk
Moldboard plow
Common Assumptions:
Location
– Waseca, MNSoil type – Nicollet-WebsterPlant corn – May 1Herbicide application 1 – May 15Herbicide application 2 – June 1Harvest corn – October 15Nitrogen – 150 kg/ha
Phosphorus
– 15 kg/ha
Potassium
– 46 kg/haSlide34
Cover Crop Seeding Options
r
owbot.com
hagie.comSlide35
Corn Yield Vs. Tillage & Stover RemovalSlide36
Change in SOC Vs. Tillage & Stover RemovalSlide37
Soil Loss Vs. Tillage & Stover RemovalSlide38
Nitrogen Loss Vs. Tillage & Stover RemovalSlide39
Corn Stover – Change in SOCSlide40
Corn Stover – Change in SOC with Time
NTCC = No Tillage with Cover Crop; NT = No Tillage.
Stover Removal Rates = 0%, 35%, and 70%.Slide41
Switchgrass – Harvested YieldSlide42
Switchgrass – Change in SOCSlide43
Switchgrass – Soil LossSlide44
Switchgrass – Nitrogen LossSlide45
Switchgrass – Change in SOC with TimeSlide46
Switchgrass Vs. Corn Stover – Change in SOCSlide47
Switchgrass Vs. Corn Stover – Soil LossSlide48
Switchgrass Vs. Corn Stover – Nitrogen LossSlide49
SOC Sequestration – Literature Moisture content – 15% (w.b
.).
Kwon et al. (2013), Biomass and
Bioenergy
55: 299-310.
Hudiburg
et al. (2015), GCB
Bioenergy
7(2): 366-374.Slide50
SOC Sequestration – This Study Moisture content – 15% (w.b
.).Slide51
Project Outcomes and Impacts
Compared logistics systems for corn
stover
,
switchgrass
, and willow
Compared
round bale/bulk and rectangular bale
systems for corn
stover
and
switchgrass
Evaluated chipped
biomass (50% moisture) for
willow
Cost,
fossil energy, and lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions were lower for rectangular bale systems than for round bale/bulk systems for both corn
stover
and
switchgrass
Cost,
fossil energy, and lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions were lower for corn stover than for switchgrass for both rectangular bales and round bale/bulk systemsCost, fossil energy, and lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions for willow were between cornstover and switchgrass on a dry ton basisSlide52
Project Outcomes and Impacts
Estimated
change in SOC, nitrogen loss, and soil
loss for
corn
stover
and
switchgrass
Change
in soil organic carbon, soil loss, and nitrogen loss for no tillage corn with a rye cover crop and 35% residue removal were comparable to no tillage corn with zero residue removal
Change
in soil organic carbon, soil loss, and nitrogen loss for no tillage corn with rye cover
crop (35% removal)
were comparable to
switchgrass
Results
for corn
stover
suggest no tillage with cover crops allows significant residue removal in highly productive
soils, aiding residue management, but
monitoring change in SOC is important
Results will aid in estimating carbon foot print for biomass logistics systems including changes in soil organic carbonResults can be used in developing policies related to biomass as a feedstock for biofuelsSlide53
ProductsJournal article:
Economic and Environmental Analysis for Corn Stover and
Switchgrass
Supply
Logistics.
BioEnergy
Research
DOI:
10.1007/s12155-015-9609-y
Another journal article in preparation
One poster presentation
Four oral presentations
Two Post-Doc/Research Associates supportedSlide54
Questions?Vance Moreyrvmorey@umn.edu