Bioenergy crop productionhandling pennington

BIOEN2: Bioenergy Crop Production, Handling & Logistics

Dennis Pennington – Michigan State University Extension

Agenda

• Overview of BION2: Bioenergy Crop Production and Harvesting

• Research data from MI

• Handling and logistics

BIOEN2: Bioenergy Crops

2.1 Analyzing the economics of bioenergy crop production• Cost-benefit analysis in farm decision-making• Bioenergy crop budgets• Analyzing potential markets• Federal and state incentive programs for

production of biomass

BIOEN2: Bioenergy Crops

2.2 Bioenergy Crop Production: a crop by crop analysis• Crop production– 19 fact sheets– Crop Comparison Matrix

• Energy Potential Box

BIOEN2: Bioenergy Crops

2.3 Bioenergy Crop Production Sustainability Factors• Landscape diversity• Carbon Offset Markets• Life Cycle Analysis• Sustainable Management

Crop by Crop Analysis

Michigan Data

Switchgrass Agronomy Trial

MiscanthusEstablishment Trial

SwitchgrassVariety Trial Biofuel Productivity Trial

Biofuel Productivity Plot Locations

• 2009 (6)– Antrim, Barry, Cass,

Isabella, Kalamazoo, Saginaw

• 2010 (5)– Alger, Ottawa, Presque

Isle, Clinton, St. Joseph

• 2011 (7)– Wayne, Kent, Muskegon,

Osceola, Otsego, Branch, Lapeer

Funding Partners

Crops

Perennial• Switchgrass• Miscanthus• Indiangrass• Big Bluestem• Little Bluestem• Prairie Cordgrass• Reed Canarygrass

Annual• Forage sorghum• Sweet sorghum• Energy sorghum

– Photoperiod sensitive– Non-PS

• Corn• Canola• Oriental mustard• Sunflower• Soybean• Pennycress

Wildlife damage

Frost damage on switchgrass

Lodging

Sweet sorghum – Clinton CountyAugust 6, 2010

Lodging

Cass CountyNovember 9, 2010

Big Bluestem Indiangrass

Weed Control

Sunflowers (and ragweed!) – Clinton Co.June 1, 2010

Cass County (Edward Lowe Foundation)

2010 2011

Yield1 Ethanol2 Yield1 Ethanol2

Switchgrass 3.57 303.5 7.28 618.8 a

Indiangrass 5.02 426.7 6.97 592.5 ab

Miscanthus 3.77 320.5 6.56 557.6 ab

Big Bluestem 3.07 261.0 3.43 291.6 b

1 tons of dry matter/acre2 tons/acre X 85 gal/ton = gal of ethanol/acre3 Ethanol yield calculated at 2.8 gallons per bushel for corn grain.

Kellogg Biological Station2009 2010 2011

Yield1 Ethanol2 Yield1 Ethanol2 Yield1 Ethanol2

Canola (lbs/a) - - 121.6 - 467.4 -Oriental mustard (lbs/a) - - - - 179.3 -Sweet Sorghum 13.37 1136.5 7.66 651.1 7.32 622.2Energy sorghum (PS) - - 8.53 725.1 7.64 649.4Energy sorghum (non-PS) - - 10.9 924.0 7.55 641.8Switchgrass - - 4.42 375.7 5.31 451.4Miscanthus - - 4.4 373.2 7.80 663.0Indiangrass - - 3.5 300.9 4.60 391.0Big bluestem - - 2.6 221.9 2.51 213.4Little bluestem - - - - 1.48 125.8Reed Canarygrass - - 1.9 163.2 2.53 215.1Forage sorghum 6.63 563.6 4.9 418.2 4.16 353.6Corn grain 108.3 303.24 - - - -Corn stover 3.13 266.1 - - - -

1 tons of dry matter/acre2 tons/acre X 85 gal/ton = gal of ethanol/acre3 Ethanol yield cacluated at 2.8 gallons per bushel for corn grain.

12-13 foot tallProduced seed head10.87 tons DM per acreKBS

14-15 foot tallNo seed head8.53 tons DM per acreKBS

Energy SorghumHigh Biomass Sorghum Photoperiod Sensitive Sorghum

Ottawa County (GVSU)

2010 2011 Yield1 Ethanol2 Yield1 Ethanol2

Switchgrass 1.9 161.5 6.48 550.8

Miscanthus 2.88 244.8 8.96 761.6

Sweet Sorghum 6.7 572.1 - -

Corn grain 68.0 190.4 - -

Corn stover 3.6 303.5 - -

1 tons of dry matter/acre2 tons/acre X 85 gal/ton = gal of ethanol/acre3 Ethanol yield cacluated at 2.8 gallons per bushel for corn grain.

Ottawa County (GVSU)

Miscanthus Establishment

• Purpose: compare transplants started in greenhouse to planting bare rhizomes in non-irrigated soil

• Treatments:– m-root = bare root planted directly in soil– m-trans = live plant grown for 8 weeks in

greenhouse

In partnership with and funded by the Energy Biosciences Institute at the University of Illinois.

Miscanthus transplants

2009 2010 20110

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

m-rootm-trans

Perc

ent M

orta

lity

Miscanthus Establishment

Miscanthus Establishment

2009 20100

10

20

30

40

50

60

18.6

35.637.1

49.1

m-rootm-trans

Tille

rs p

er P

lant

Miscanthus Establishment

2009 2010 2011 Total0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

1.53

3.98

8.33

13.84

3.72

6.52

10.19

20.43

m-rootm-trans

Yiel

d (D

ry M

atter

Ton

s pe

r Acr

e)

Switchgrass Variety Trial (KBS)

Yield (tons DM/acre) Ecotype Year 1 Year 2 Year 3Alamo L a 3.59 3.87Blackwell U a 4.51 4.67Cave-in-Rock U a 4.22 4.48Dakota U a 1.71 1.81EG 1101 L 1.44 2.42 -EG 1102 L 2.18 4.08 -EG 2101 U 0.94 2.41 -Kanlow L a 2.62 4.40NE28 L a 2.53 2.47Shelter U 0.90 2.12 -Southlow U a 2.44 3.46Trailblazer U a 2.25 2.30

a In varieties established in 2009, yield data was not collected due to the fact that mowing was needed for weed control.L=lowland ecotype (typically out produces upland, grown in southern states)U=upland ecotype (better overwinter survival in northern states like Michigan)

Handling & Logistics

Photo by J.E Doll, MSU

Biomass Feedstock Sources

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Total

Agricultural

Forest

Million Dry Tons Per Year

• Logging residues• Excess timber (fuel treatments)• Fuel wood• Processing residues• Pulping liquors

Forest

• Crop residues• Grains• Perennial Grasses• Woody crops• Food processing waste• Municipal solid waste

Agricultural

Source: Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply, U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Department of Agriculture, April 2005.

Amount needed to reach U.S. bioenergy goals

DensityPhysical1000 lbs/(36” x 48” x 96”) = 10.42 lb/ft3

Physical56 lbs/1.24 ft3 = 45.16 lb/ft3

Energy

Energy

125,000 acres

115,000 acres

Biomass Field DayVonore, TNOctober 2011

Two Material Handling Systems: Bales

Two Material Handling Systems: Bulk

So which system is better?

Bales• More dense• Easier for farmer to handle• Cheaper at the farm end

Bulk• Less dense - requires

packing equip for transportation

• Saves de-twine, de-bale and chop operations at biorefinery

• Cheaper at biorefinery

Other issues

• Year round supply – can’t deliver all at harvest• Storage on farm– Covered bales– Bunker silo

• Equipment cost – baler is much cheaper

Cellulosic Ethanol

• How close is it?• 3-5 years?• Poet Ethanol– Reduced energy use, enzyme costs, raw material

requirements and capital expenses (Dec. 09)$4.13

$2. 35Photo by Dr. Cole Gustafson, NDSU

Cellulosic Ethanol

• How close is it?• 3-5 years?• Genera Energy• $1.65 cash costs + $0.30 capital costs

$2. 00

http://fyi.uwex.edu/biotrainingcenter/

Questions?