2004
DOI: 10.1016/s0377-2217(03)00354-0
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Supply chain modelling of forest fuel

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
60
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 156 publications
(60 citation statements)
references
References 2 publications
0
60
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Monthly plans for forwarding, storage and chipping were also determined. Different scenarios were tested based on storage restrictions, increased demand, chipping capacity and including new terminals [18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Monthly plans for forwarding, storage and chipping were also determined. Different scenarios were tested based on storage restrictions, increased demand, chipping capacity and including new terminals [18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) modelling was used by Gunnarsson et al (2004) with the aim of supplying from different forests and sawmills to various heating plants while minimising forwarding, chipping, storing and transportation costs. One of the decision variables included in the model was whether or not to acquire residues from forests and sawmills that were not owned by the supplying company.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors developed a regional fuel wood supply network that included the optimal use of terminals by testing a number of different scenarios based on demand, upgrading of energy plants and inclusion of harvesting residues. Together with Eriksson & Bjoerheden (1989) and Gunnarsson et al (2004) the authors have concluded that direct supply (without the use of intermediate terminals) is the most efficient and economical way to supply fuels to heating and power plants. Although the use of terminals can improve the quality of the biomass by minimising the MC and therefore increasing the energy content, it does not pay off the cost of making them part of the supply chain (Kanzian et al 2009).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although the chipping plant can achieve intensive chipping and improve efficiency, the construction of a chipping plant required heavy investment in terms of funds, equipment and labor. It was possible to increase the supply amount of chipped sandy shrub residue in the forestland (33% of the total supply), as shown in [32]. The price of a household shrub chipper was relatively high, so if the households have not specifically been engaged in raw material collection work, they would generally not be willing to buy a chipper which was why they would rather sell the non-chipped sandy shrub stubble residue to the chipping plant.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%