Cost evaluation of alternative switchgrass producing, harvesting, storing, and transporting systems and their logistics in the Southeastern USA

Abstract

Purpose -The US Department of Energy has a goal to make ethanol from biomass cost competitive with petroleum by 2012. Feedstock procurement is expected to represent a significant portion of the operating costs for a refinery that produces ethanol from biomass such as switchgrass. Thus, costeffective feedstock logistics will be a key factor for the future development of a capital intensive cellulosic ethanol industry. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the cost of various logistic methods of switchgrass production, harvesting, storing, and transportation. Design/methodology/approach -This study applied enterprise budgeting and geographical information system (GIS) software to analyze the costs of three logistic methods of acquiring switchgrass feedstock for a 25 million gallon per year refinery. Procurement methods included traditional large round and rectangular bale harvest and storage systems and satellite preprocessing facilities using field-chopped material. The analysis evaluated tradeoffs in operating costs, dry matter losses during storage, and investment requirements among the three systems. Findings -Results suggest that the preprocessing system outperformed the conventional bale harvest methods in the delivered costs of switchgrass. Practical implications -The cost savings in harvest, transportation, and dry matter losses for the preprocessing system offset their extensive capital costs and generated cost advantages over the conventional methods. Social implications -The traditional round bale system has a higher overall investment cost, may not be the most cost-effective way to procure switchgrass feedstock for a refinery, and may limit farmer participation in the feedstock value chain. Originality/value -GIS methods combined with enterprise budgeting can be useful tools for evaluating investment in feedstock supply chain infrastructure.

Yield and Nutrient Concentration Response to Switchgrass Biomass Harvest Date

“…An extended harvest season would require fewer harvest machines per biorefinery thereby reducing overall harvest machinery fixed costs (Epplin and Haque, 2011; Haque and Epplin, 2012). An extended harvest window would enable a just‐in‐time delivery system during harvest months and reduce overall storage cost (Cundiff and Marsh, 1996; Larson et al, 2010; Grisso et al, 2013). However, with an extended harvest window, the expected harvestable yield and the expected fertilization requirement for the succeeding year might differ depending on the harvest date.…”

Switchgrass procurement strategies for managing yield variability: Estimating the cost-efficient D (downtime cost) L (land to lease) frontier

“…Losses for bales stored inside were negligible. Larson et al [22] found storage dry matter losses of 30% for rectangular solid bales of switchgrass that were covered with a tarp and stored for 360 days. They estimated storage cost to be 6 $ Mg À1 y À1 for tarp and pallet and 12 $ Mg À1 y À1 for tarp and gravel.…”

Continuous Alkali-Cellulase Processing of Corn Stover to Glucose for Bioethanol

“…Upwards of $100 is estimated for one truck transporting biomass a distance of 60 km from farm to refinery (Brechbill et al 2011). An approach to reducing transportation cost could involve preprocessing locally at regional centers, but this is envisioned as being limited to mechanical preparation of the biomass such as cleaning, comminution, and packaging (Larson et al 2010). A feedstock cooperative among farmers could provide economies in use of equipment and provide employment during seasons when the biomass is not grown.…”