Systematic assessment of triticale‐based biorefinery strategies: a biomass procurement strategy for economic success

Abstract

An economical supply of biomass feedstock is an essential part of any biorefi nery project. With procurement costs accounting for nearly 50% of operating costs, current biomass supply chain and procurement operations must be continuously improved to reduce procurement costs. Strategic negotiations between the farmer (the producer) and the end user (the biorefi nery), in which both parties benefi t, should also take place. This study examines procurement supply chains for triticale, for a biorefi nery, and proposes a fi nancial model that will satisfy both producer and end user. A biomass cost model was developed to determine the procurement costs of triticale biomass. Several biomass procurement supply chain alternatives were evaluated. Results from the study determined that a biorefi nery would pay $225 per tonne of biomass for the delivery of 250 002 tonnes of triticale grain and 265 791 tonnes of triticale straw per year. In addition, the study shows that increased yields of triticale and its similarities in growing and harvesting methods with currently produced agricultural crops will rapidly enable it to become a viable feedstock source for biorefi neries. The biomass procurement strategy described appears to be an attractive alternative for producers and provides a good basis for furnishing a long-term cost-competitive supply of feedstock to the triticale biorefi nery. This fi nancial model is based on the premise that the risk and cost of developing increasingly engineered triticale crops will be borne by the biorefi nery owner.

Systematic assessment of triticale‐based biorefinery strategies: market competitive analysis for business model development

“…The criteria assessment was made mainly based on (i) mass balances presented by Chambost et al ., (ii) the biomass delivery cost model introduced by Melendez et al ., and (iii) using operating costs presented by Sanaei et al . Product market prices were collected over the last two years preceding the study, taking into account the lowest value for determining the worst case earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA) and the average value for ‘normal’ market conditions.…”

Green, Yellow, and Woody Biomass Supply-Chain Management: A Review

“…Triticale is a hybrid of wheat and rye not widely considered as a crop for bioenergy production. A study that focused on the assessment of triticale as a potential biorefinery feedstock is the one presented by [17]. They introduced improved harvesting methods that have a positive effect on costs reduction and availability secure of high-quality biomass in the long-run.…”

Systematic assessment of triticale‐based biorefinery strategies: techno‐economic analysis to identify investment opportunities

“…The investment cost in Step I has been estimated using large-block analysis, 24 in which (a) the cost the main process technology is supplied by technology developers, and (b) costs of the different process blocks are estimated using a common evaluation methodology so that they can be compared on a relative basis. The biomass feedstock cost used in Step II has been extracted from Melendez et al 25 and straw are used as feedstocks. These three product platforms are (i) bioethanol, (ii) polylactic acid (PLA), and (iii) a blend of thermoplastic starch (TPS) and PLA.…”

“…No premium for production of green electricity 20% premium paid for grain to farmers 25 Farmer participation rates 85% for grain, 70% for straw 25 Harvesting & transportation Farmer responsible for harvesting, while the biorefinery responsible for raw material transportation 25 Biomass inventory 15 days (including one week at the farm at no cost)…”