Options for Increasing Biomass Output from Long‐Rotation Forestry

Egnell, Gustaf; Björheden, Rolf

doi:10.1002/9781118957844.ch18

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, estimates of harvestable fractions, or of actually harvested fractions, vary significantly (Abbas et al., ; Stupak et al., ; Thiffault, Béchard, Paré, & Allen, ; Verkerk, Lindner, Anttila, & Asikainen, ; Verkerk et al., ). Environmental considerations and regulations of forestry operations in general influence harvest rates; further, some forest residues are left on site due to technical and profitability constraints (Egnell & Björheden, ). Due to difficulties in producing a literature synthesis supporting the use of geographically varying residue harvest rates in the modeling, we adopted a constant harvest rate and used it for all countries, based on de Jong, Akselsson, et al.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geospatial supply–demand modeling of biomass residues for co‐firing in European coal power plants

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biomass co-firing with coal is a near-term option to displace fossil fuels and can facilitate the development of biomass conversion and the build-out of biomass supply infrastructure. A GIS-based modeling framework (EU-28, Norway, and Switzerland) is used to quantify and localize biomass demand for co-firing in coal power plants and agricultural and forest residue supply potentials; supply and demand are then matched based on minimizing the total biomass transport costs (field to gate). Key datasets (e.g., land cover, land use, and wood production) are available at 1,000 m or higher resolution, while some data (e.g., simulated yields) and assumptions (e.g., crop harvest index) have lower resolution and were resampled to allow modeling at 1,000 m resolution. Biomass demand for co-firing is estimated at 184 PJ in 2020, corresponding to an emission reduction of 18 Mt CO 2 . In all countries except Italy and Spain, the sum of the forest and agricultural residues available at less than 300 km from a co-firing plant exceeds the assessed biomass demand. The total cost of transporting residues to these plants is reduced if agricultural residues can be used, as transport distances are shorter. The total volume of forest residues less than 300 km from a co-firing plant corresponds to about half of the assessed biomass demand. Almost 70% of the total biomass demand for co-firing is found in Germany and Poland. The volumes of domestic forest residues in Germany (Poland) available within the cost range 2-5 (1.5-3.5) €/GJ biomass correspond to about 30% (70%) of the biomass demand. The volumes of domestic forest and agricultural residues in Germany (Poland) within the cost range 2-4 (below 2) €/GJ biomass exceed the biomass demand for co-firing.Half of the biomass demand is located within 50 km from ports, indicating that long-distance biomass transport by sea is in many instances an option. K E Y W O R D Sagriculture, bioenergy, CO 2 emissions, co-firing, European Union, forestry, geographic information system, residues

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geospatial supply–demand modeling of biomass residues for co‐firing in European coal power plants

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The use of fertilization to overcome nutrient constraints to aboveground productivity has become standard practice for increasing tree yields in many forest ecosystems (Tamm, 1991;Bergh et al, 1999;Elser et al, 2007;Egnell and Björheden, 2013). While single applications of fertilizer yield only temporary increases in stand and tree growth, frequent applications produce large increases in harvest volume and sustained growth in boreal forests (Tamm, 1991;Bergh et al, 1999;Tamm et al, 1999).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Ectomycorrhizal community structure and function in interior spruce forests of British Columbia under long term fertilization

Hay

Phillips

Nicholson

et al. 2015

Forest Ecology and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Notwithstanding constraints related to environmental regulations, it is generally understood that a portion of the total harvest residues is left on the cutover due to technical and profitability constraints . A better knowledge of these constraints and how they influence the actual harvest residue recovery rate would help us provide realistic estimates of current and future technical potential from this feedstock source .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Recovery rate of harvest residues for bioenergy in boreal and temperate forests: A review

Thiffault

Béchard

Paré

et al. 2014

WIREs Energy & Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Harvest residues are an attractive woody biomass feedstock for bioenergy production. A portion of the total harvest residues are generally left in the cutblock due to technical and profitability constraints. A better understanding of the factors influencing the variability of residue operational recovery rate is important to inform accurately policy development on sustainable forest biomass procurement practices. We compiled the results of field trials from boreal and temperate forests to quantify the range of variation of residue recovery rates and to identify the main factors explaining this variability. The average recovery rate was 52.2%, with minimum and maximum values of 4.0 and 89.1%, and a near-normal distribution around the average. The main factor contributing to this variation was country of operations, which encompasses aspects of bioenergy policy and markets, technological learning, and forestry context. A shift in bioenergy policy, a growth in (and a change in access to) bioenergy markets, and upward movements along the technological learning curve could increase residue recovery rates approaching the highest values observed in this study, such as those in Nordic countries (72% residue recovery), or even higher if economic and technological conditions keep improving. However, local stand conditions, especially in North America where natural variability is high among forest stands, may continue to constrain operational recovery of harvest residues. Our results suggest the need for the development of policies that define practices and thresholds based on the ecological suitability of ecosystems, with clear definitions and explicit standards for harvest residue inventory, quantification, and retention.

show abstract

Options for Increasing Biomass Output from Long‐Rotation Forestry

Cited by 6 publications

References 15 publications

Geospatial supply–demand modeling of biomass residues for co‐firing in European coal power plants

Geospatial supply–demand modeling of biomass residues for co‐firing in European coal power plants

Ectomycorrhizal community structure and function in interior spruce forests of British Columbia under long term fertilization

Recovery rate of harvest residues for bioenergy in boreal and temperate forests: A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About