Post on 14-Mar-2021
Energy Crop Resources and Technologies
Global Climate Energy ProgramBiomass Energy Workshop
Standford University April 27, 2004
Lynn Wright, Biomass Consultant wrightll@att.net, 865-376-0037
Formerly with Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Outline
• Brief Energy Crop R&D History• Energy Crop Production Technology• Potential Energy Crop Supplies (Analysis Results)• Lessons Learned from Implementation Efforts• Need for all Biomass Resources • Biomass Supply Vision • Lessons from Agriculture• What If?
ORNL Managed DOE’s Bioenergy Feedstock Research from 1978 to 2002
MolecularGenetics
EnvironmentalStudies
EconomicAnalysis
Project Support
ORNL R,D&D
Crop development withUniversities and USDA
Significant PrivateSector Involvement
~$100 Million DOEInvestment
Minnesota Hybrid Poplar Minnesota Hybrid Poplar Research CooperativeResearch Cooperative
Willow Farmers CoopWillow Farmers Coop
Prairie LandsPrairie LandsBioProductsBioProducts, ,
Inc.Inc.Tree Genetic Tree Genetic Engineering Engineering Research Research CoopCoop
Poplar Poplar Molecular Molecular Genetics CoopGenetics Coop
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
Year
No.
Spe
cies
HerbaceousWoody
> 100 woody species screened25 identified as high potential, 7 selected for developmentPoplars and willows adoptedcommercially
35 herbaceous species screened4 identified as high-potential,Switchgrass selected fordevelopment as model
Energy Crop Species Screening, Model Selection
By late 80’s woody research focused on 7 species and grass screening had begun
Bioenergy Feedstock Experimental and Operational Research Sites in the U.S.
Woody crop management requirements were well established by late 1980’s and switchgrass energy crop
potential was identified.
SwitchgrassWillow coppiceHybrid Poplar Harvested annuallyHarvested at age 5 to 10 Harvested at age 3 or 4
Switchgrass, is produced in 10 year rotations with annual harvest, using conventional agricultural equipment, add N at ~ 10 kg/dry Mg yield/yr
Switchgrass Yield Examples: Actual and Predicted with ALMANAC
10.210.19 yr avg. 1 cut
10.610.59 yr avg. 2 cutTallasee,AL
10.218.01994 2 cut
13.613.61993 1 cut
15.716.71994 2 cut
11.711.81993 2 cutBeeville,TX
13.813.42 yr avg.Meade,NE
12.012.36 yr avg.Blacksburg,VA
ALMANACYield (Mg/ha)
Field Yield (Mg/ha)
ConditionsSITE
Switchgrass can significantly improve soil quality and stability, and increase soil carbon in cropland soils, because of high root to top ratio
Soil carbon gain modeledBased on actual field dataGarten (ORNL)
Poplars are produced for fiber on cropland soils at 3-4m spacing in 6-10 yr rotations, weed control is critical, currently harvested with forestry equipment
Early 2nd yr poplar growth
Weed control effectsFirst hardwoodlinkage map was a poplar hybrid, complete genomenow nearly done.
Perennial Cover- Wind Erosion Control
up to 10H- Water Erosion Control
Removal of AgriculturalChemical from Ground Water
Tree Height (H)
No Annual FeedstockStorage Cost
Low Chemical Input<10kg N/ha/yr (or ~ 75kg/rotation)
No site disturbancefor 5-10 years
Soil Carbon-Amendment~ 1.4 dry Mg/ha/yr
fine root turnover~2.5 dry Mg/ha/yr
biomass accumulationbelow ground
Life HistoryFast-growing perennialsNine native species andnumerous hybrid clones
Cultural PracticesShort rotation forestry
on agricultural land
Productivity Potential10 to 25 dry Mg/ha/yr
Native Range of AllNorth American Populus
ca. 6
0 ft
at a
ge 8
Wildlife Habitat- Winter Cover- Early Spring
oblique root sinker root
Root Depth
5 ft
horizontal roots
ATTRIBUTES OF POPULUS
Very rapid tree growth (~15-25 Mg/ha/year) is obtainable where plenty of sunlight, water and space are availableChallenge is obtaining similar growth at tight spacings or under poorer growing conditions
Age 6 Hybrid Poplar In Oregon Age 7 Eucalyptus in Brazil
Willow is produced on cropland at ½ to 1 m spacings, harvested in 3 years, using special harvest equipment,
Species trials – double spaced rows
Willow ready forharvest
Analysis Result Example: Predictions of Potential Energy Crop Production Using 2008 Yield Assumptions
0
2
4
6
8
10
Hec
tare
s of
land
(m
illio
ns)
$33 dMg, Wildlife $44 dMg, ProductionFarmgate price and Scenario
CropCRPIdlePasture
USDA Demand Sector Model (POLYSYS) modified for analysis. Both scenario’s assume 75% of Conservation Reserve Program Subsidies are available to farmers. Switchgrasspredominates as higher profit potential crop for farmers at farmgate.
Areas Supporting Predicted Potential Biomass Production are a Function of Price, Production Restrictions, and Subsidies
Scenario 1: $33/dMg (farmgate) withwildlife restrictions and 75% of CRP land subsidy - 77 million dry Mg of switchgrass and poplars
Scenario 2: $44dMg (farmgate) withno restrictions and 75% of CRP land subsidy - 170 million dry Mg of mostly switchgrass
Lessons learned from operational scale biomass demonstration projects and systems studies
• Crop productivity is only one aspect of commercial viability
• Supply logistics issues often are major barriers– Harvesting requirements– Storage and processing needs– Quality requirements
• Many non-technical and institutional barriers exist – Policy barriers– Business/market development
barriers– Fossil fuel prices– Farmer profitability potential
Biomass Supplies in Context
Slide from Overend (NREL)
Potential Available Lignocellulosic Feedstock Quantities (ORNL, 1999)
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
22 (1.4) 33 (2.0) 44 (2.7) 55 (3.4)
Delivered cost $/dry Mg ($/GJ)
Cum
ulat
ive
Qua
ntiti
es(m
illio
n dr
y to
nne)
Urban Wastes Mill Residues Forest Residues Ag Residues Energy Crops
All types of biomass, plus technology advances, are needed to provide significant supplies
Billion ton feedstock vision
• 5% of nation’s power, 20% of transport fuels, and 25% of chemicals by 2030
• Combined target is 30% of current petroleum consumption
• What are the constraints- Annual production must be
sustainable- integrated feedstock supply system
(reliability, quality, and consistency)
- economic profitability for all in the feedstock supply chain
- acceptable life-cycle environmental impact
- net positive social impacts (production and products) Figure 1. Biomass feedstock vision goals. Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Roadmap for Agriculture Biomass Feedstock
Supply in the United States, DOE/NE-ID-11129, November 2003.Figure 1. Biomass feedstock vision goals. Source: U.S. Department of Energy, Roadmap for Agriculture Biomass FeedstockSupply in the United States, DOE/NE-ID-11129, November 2003.
bark
sawdust
black liquor
Process Residues
Bioenergyforest harvest for energy
short rotation woody cropsherbaceous energy crops
forest slash
harvest residuesbagasse
stalks & straws
EnergyServicesheatCHPelectricity
Biomass
pulppaperlumberplywoodcotton
Materials
ConsumersMSW clean fractionyard trimmingsconstr. & demolitionwoodnon-recyclable
organics
Crops, Animals
dung
ProcessResidues
charcoalethanolhydrogen
Biofuels
Food
Fiber
Biomass Flows in the U.S. Economy
From Overend (NREL)
Current land uses, desired products, and environmental preferences limit biomass resource availability
Major US Land Catagories 916 million hectares total
177
234202
303
Permanent PastureArable & CroplandForest & WoodlandAll Others
Forest and Woodland303 million hectares
20431
68TimberlandReservedOther
Arable and Cropland177 million hectares
45
21
26 30
24
31CornWheatSoybeansHayOther CropsOther Misc
Source: Agriculture Statistics, 2003Source: US Forest Service 2002 RPA tables
Land use changes are linked to technology change
1st 10 Generations
2nd 10 Generations
Cos
t ($
/ton
)
Yield (ton/ac/yr)
Current conventional approach
Rapid domestication approach
The functional relationship between yield and cost of The functional relationship between yield and cost of growing trees could be radically changed with rapid growing trees could be radically changed with rapid domestication approachdomestication approach
Possible cost reduction from woody crop domestication
• 8’ x 8’ or 10’ x 10’ spacing
• $0.21 / cutting• 8-12 Mg / ha / yr• 8-10 year rotation• $14-20/Mg harvest cost
$50-60 / Mg
• 4’ x 8’ or 6’ x 6’ spacing
• $0.12 / cutting• 25-30 Mg / ha / yr• 5-6 year rotation• $8 /Mg harvest cost
$20-$25 / Mg
Typical assumptionsIn 2000
Domesticated cropconcepts
Estimating Future Switchgrass Yields (Mg/ha)
Current range - - - field-scale9-22
POLYSYS average US at $44/Mg ($53.8 delivered)“ “ at $30.3/Mg ($37.3 delivered)
9.411.1
Current regional small plot average15
Typical best small plot each year for each of 3 regions in SE/SC22
***Projected field-scale yield in 20 y ***15-22
Best small plot –single year34
Maximum single plant –unwatered nursery47
ALMANAC theoretical51.6
Simulated qnnual yield of corn grain and Switchgrass using ALMANACindicate Switchgrass not as sensitive to land quality as corn.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00 10.00
Actual Corn Grain Yields (Mg/ha/y)
Sim
ulat
ed C
orn
and
Switc
hgra
ss Y
ield
s(M
g/ha
/y)
CornSimSWGSim
Corn Grain
Switchgrass
Source:Kiniry, Ugarte,McLaughlin, 2004 analysis
What if?
• All major crops were harvested for multiple uses (with sufficient residues left on soil for sustainability)?
• Protein for animals and cellulose for ethanol could be efficiently derived from the same crop (eg. alfalfa and/or switchgrass)?
• Average switchgrass yields could be doubled. • Switchgrass were a nitrogen fixer?• Harvest techniques for grasses or alfalfa could efficiently separate
leafy parts (protein source) from stems (lignin and cellulose source)?• Poplars could be domesticated and yields doubled or tripled? • Poplars could be more cheaply and quickly harvested?• Grass, tree and grain crops were more drought tolerant?• Conversion technologies were more efficient and capable of using
multiple biomass sources to reduce storage problems.
Future land uses and product mixes could differArable and Cropland, current
177 million hectares
45
21
26 30
24
31CornWheatSoybeansHayOther CropsOther Misc
Currently most corn and wheat stalks areleft on the ground
Corn grain and soybeans are major sources ofanimal protein
“Other Misc” includes land that is idled or inConservation or Environmental ReservePrograms
In hypothetical scenario below :
Human consumption of meat not changedMost crops partitioned for food & energy orfiber and energy.
Protein for animal production derivedmostly from switchgrass and alfalfa Most annual crops grown under no-till conditionsAll “other misc” land used for crop production
e.g. perennials to preserve conservation values
Arable and Cropland, hypothetical 177 million hectares
26
12
202020
60
19
CornWheatSoybeansHay (alfalfa)Other CropsGrass CropsWood Crops
Managing our lands for energy, food and fiber
Acknowledgements & References
• For feedstock research recommendations – especially for agricultural residues, see “Roadmap for Agriculture Biomass Feedstock Supplyin the United States”
• at www.bioproducts-bioenergy.gov/publications.asp• Information and ideas were derived from many sources
– Jerry Tuskan – Oak Ridge National Laboratory– Marie Walsh – formerly ORNL, now University of Tennessee– Robert Perlack – Oak Ridge National Laboratory– Ralph Overend – National Renewable Energy Laboratory– Sandy McLaughlin/Daniel Ugarte – University of Tennessee– Jim Kiniry – USDA Grassland, Soil and Water Research Lab– Lee Lynd & collaborators (Renewable Biomass Alternative Energy Future Study)– USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service – Trends in U.S. Agriculture– USDA US Forest Service – Forest Facts and Historical Trends