Economics of a coordinated biorefinery feedstock harvest system: lignocellulosic biomass harvest cost

被引:63
作者
Thorsell, S
Epplin, FM [1 ]
Huhnke, RL
Taliaferro, CM
机构
[1] Oklahoma State Univ, Dept Agr Econ, Stillwater, OK 74078 USA
[2] Oklahoma State Univ, Dept Agr & Biosyst Engn, Stillwater, OK 74078 USA
[3] Oklahoma State Univ, Dept Plant & Soil Sci, Stillwater, OK 74078 USA
关键词
lignocellulosic biomass; harvest; cost; economics; biorefinery; gasification-fermentation;
D O I
10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.03.001
中图分类号
S2 [农业工程];
学科分类号
0828 ;
摘要
A potential advantage of lignocellulosic biomass gasification-fermentation technology is that a variety of feedstocks, including agricultural residues, native grasses, introduced perennials, and dedicated energy crops may be gasified by the same facility. Since harvest windows differ across species, gasification-fermentation technology would enable the use of specialized harvest and collection machinery throughout many months. and reduce the fixed costs of harvest machinery per unit of feedstock. This study was conducted to determine the cost to harvest lignocellulosic biomass for use as biorefinery feedstock, and to determine the potential economies of size that might result from a coordinated structure. An agricultural machinery cost computer program was used to determine which specific type of machines would result in the lowest costs at intensive levels of use. A machinery complement estimator was used to design a coordinated set of machines and estimate costs for owning and operating the machines. The designed coordinated harvest unit includes ten laborers, nine tractors, three mowers, three rakes, three balers, and one bale transporter. The cost for mowing, raking, baling, gathering, and stacking in-field was estimated to be from $11.26 to $14.01 Mg-1 depending upon biomass yield. A biorefinery with an annual feedstock requirement of 9 10 Gg yr(-1) would require approximately 18 harvest units and an average machinery investment of $11 million. Additional research is necessary to determine the cost to procure material from the landowner, the cost to store, storage losses, and the cost to transport feedstock from in-field stacks to a biorefinery. (C) 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
引用
收藏
页码:327 / 337
页数:11
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
American Agricultural Economics Association, 2000, COMM COSTS RET EST H
[2]  
CUNDIFF JS, 1995, RESOURCE, V2, P8
[3]   THE ECONOMIC-FEASIBILITY OF CROP RESIDUES AS AUXILIARY FUEL IN COAL-FIRED POWER-PLANTS [J].
ENGLISH, BC ;
SHORT, C ;
HEADY, EO .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 1981, 63 (04) :636-644
[4]   Cost to produce and deliver switchgrass biomass to an ethanol-conversion facility in the Southern Plains of the United States [J].
Epplin, FM .
BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 1996, 11 (06) :459-467
[5]  
Gallagher P, 1999, ENERG J, V20, P89
[6]  
GLASSNER DA, 1998, BIOENERGY 98
[7]   Harvest of grass for combustion in late summer and in spring [J].
Hadders, G ;
Olsson, R .
BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 1997, 12 (03) :171-175
[8]   Will biomass be the environmentally friendly fuel of the future? [J].
Hall, DO ;
Scrase, JI .
BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 1998, 15 (4-5) :357-367
[9]  
HOHMANN N, 1993, AGR INF B USDA EC RE, V663
[10]  
HUHNKE R, 1999, AGR FIELD MACHINERY