Search

The cultivation of energy cane throughout the Southeastern United States may displace grazed pastures on organic soil (Histosols) to meet growing demands for biofuels. We combined results from a field experiment with a biogeochemical model to improve our understanding of how the conversion of pasture to energy cane during early crop establishment affected soil GHG (CO 2 , CH 4 , and N 2 O) exchange with the atmosphere. GHG fluxes were measured under both land uses during wet, hot and cool, dry times of year, and following a fertilization event. We also simulated the impact of changes in precipitation on GHG exchange. Higher fertilization of cane contributed to greater emission of N 2 O than pasture during warmer and wetter times of the year. The model predicted that energy cane emitted more nitrogen than pasture during simulated wetter than drier years. The modeled emission factor for N 2 O was 20 to 30-fold higher than the default value from IPCC (1%), suggesting that the default IPCC value could dramatically underestimate the consequences of this land conversion on the climate system. Predicted soil CH 4 and CO 2 fluxes were higher in pasture than energy cane, and this difference was not affected by increasing precipitation. Model simulations predicted that soils under first year cane emit more GHGs than pasture, particularly during wet years, but this difference disappeared two years after energy cane establishment. Our results suggest that management practices may be important in determining soil GHG emissions from energy cane on organic soils particularly during the first year of cane establishment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: For woody biomass to make a significant contribution to the United States' energy portfolio, harvesting contractors must economically harvest and transport energywood to conversion/processing facilities. We conducted a designed operational study in the Coastal Plain of North Carolina, USA with three replications of three treatments to measure harvesting productivity and costs when utilizing woody biomass. The treatments were: a conventional roundwood only harvest (control), an integrated harvest in which merchantable roundwood was delivered to mills and residuals were chipped for energy, and a chip harvest in which all stems were chipped for energy use. The harvesting contractor in this study typically delivers 2200–2700 t of green roundwood per week and is capable of wet-site harvesting. Results indicate that onboard truck green roundwood costs increased from 9.35 $ t−1 in the conventional treatment to 10.98 $ t−1 in the integrated treatment as a result of reduced felling and skidding productivity. Green energy chips were produced for 19.19 $ t−1 onboard truck in the integrated treatment and 17.93 $ t−1 in the chip treatment. Low skidding productivity contributed to high chip costs in the integrated treatment. Residual green biomass was reduced from 18 t ha−1 in the conventional treatment to 4 and 3 t ha−1 in the integrated and chip treatments, respectively. This study suggests that until energywood prices appreciate substantially, loggers are unlikely to sacrifice roundwood production to increase energywood production. This research provides unique information from a designed experiment documenting how producing energywood affects each function of a harvesting system. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The U.S. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 mandates the use, if produced, of 6.06 × 1010 L of advanced biofuels by 2022. The objective of this study is to determine the ethanol price necessary for a biorefinery to breakeven when using switchgrass as the single feedstock to produce ethanol. A holistic model that encompasses acquisition of land use services, feedstock production, harvest, harvest machine investment, feedstock logistics (storage, transportation), biorefinery location and size, and biorefinery investment is constructed and used to determine breakeven ethanol price. The model was solved for each of three biomass to ethanol conversion rates (250, 334, and 417 L of ethanol Mg−1 of biomass) and each of three biorefinery investment cost estimates ($2, $4, and $6 × 108 for a biorefinery with annual capacity of 379 × 106 L). Breakeven ethanol prices ranged from $0.44 L−1 with a conversion rate of 417 L of ethanol Mg−1 and an investment cost of $2 × 108, to $0.72 L−1 with a conversion rate of 250 L Mg−1 and an investment cost of $6 × 108. Improving the efficiency of conversion from 250 to 334 L Mg−1 decreases the estimated breakeven cost by $0. 07 L−1. Improved conversion efficiency results in a reduction of the total quantity of feedstock required and in the cost to deliver feedstock. Most of the cost reduction follows from reductions in land required (rent), and biomass harvest, storage, and transportation costs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Loblolly pine plantations are the most important source of forest products in the US and the slash remaining after conventional harvest represents a significant potential source of bioenergy. However, slash removal in intensive harvests might, under some circumstances, reduce site productivity by reducing soil organic matter and associated nutrients. Two complimentary studies in the Gulf Coastal Plain of the southeastern US were designed to test whether harvest intensity (level of biomass removal) could have a negative long-term impact on site productivity. Harvesting tree crowns in addition to the merchantable bole had a negative impact (18%) on pine biomass accumulation by age 7–10 years on 15 of 19 research blocks. Sites at risk of harvest-induced reductions in productivity were relatively unproductive prior to harvest and had low soil phosphorus (P) concentrations. Intensive harvesting, fertilization, and chemical control of non-crop vegetation were all energy efficient; the additional biomass energy gained through these practices was two-orders of magnitude greater than the energy needed to conduct the activities. Harvest of slash for bioenergy in the Gulf Coastal Plain of the southeastern US has the potential to reduce productivity on infertile soils, but fertilization has the potential to restore and even improve productivity on those sites in an energy-efficient way. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]