Biomass

[woodtroll]

Biomass would be useful out west here. We have a slash/fuel problem. If we lop and scatter the fuel levels are to high, if we whole tree we have slash piles to burn. Chipping the slash would be great but then we need a market for the chips. If we could prescribe burn it would help (liability). It is not a carbon thing it is a use for a low value or no value product.

[SwampDonkey]

It is not a carbon thing it is a use for a low value or no value product.

Precisely.

[Gary_C]

Wait now, prairie grasses are useful.  What if the buffalo make a comeback?
 

If the buffalo did make a comeback they would still be banned from these lands, just like all the taxpayers and other state residents who are the owners. Those S & N guys already have the no tresspassing signs up. Can't have the public tramping all over their preserve.

[Brian Beauchamp]

With as much money as the government here in the U.S. is pumping into biomass and biofuels research, there will be a market for them eventually. Those of you getting your niche prepared I believe are doing the right thing in my opinion. The problem lies within inflating prices of products we use for other things...we have already seen it happen with corn. We need to figure out what is not being utilized and make it a part of overall forest management so that the efficiency of the management system is increased. Focusing on the 'same old things' and just using them in a different way has created instability in markets due to the fact that something new will pop up, inflate the prices, competing markets fail and then price and profitability plummets. It may be a natural cycle to a large extent, but with a little forethought in the industry as a whole, I believe the fluctuations may be controlled somewhat. We just have to have the courage of someone like PAFaller here and anticipate the markets and be prepared to take advantage of them while staying diverse enough to be able to switch to other things when the market conditions aren't exactly optimal for certain product classes, or less so than others. I think diversity is the key though as what often drives prices low is people such as loggers not have the option to switch to other harvesting/management activities and keep pumping up the supply when the demand is declining. They just don't have the choice...they HAVE to keep logging what they have or they will stop making money. Plain and simple. Many are at the mercy of the available markets, but not always...many just haven't done the research to find out with what they can truly make a profit in their area and therefore aren't able to adjust.

Doing what I do, I get to hear a lot of management issues across the country. From what I know, PA forests are suffering from a serious lack of active management. The biomass is there and I believe that once the research going on starts to show how this biomass, especially for biofuels, may be effectively utilized, PA will be one of the first places to develop a good market. I think you are positioning yourself well, PAFaller. If you want to help guarantee that your region will be recognized, start or become a part of an organization that promotes your region and promotes new market developments. That will keep you in the loop as far as what will be the most profitable for you and your business as well as provide added stability for everyone involved in the forest industry in your region.

[PAFaller]

Brian, are there markets for biomass in your area? Right now there is a scuttle of sorts as to how to build the biomass infrastructure in the state. Some people, especially some in the state agencies, feel smaller plants are the ticket to success. Many others argue that some of these plants use so little wood they may only support one logging crew, and even then the minimal feedstock used may not justify the expense of a chipping or other type of biomass harvesting setup. With any luck we will get a wide array of facilities, but only time will tell. Right now there is talk of a combined heat and power plant, an ethanol facility, and a biocoal processor. Only time will tell I guess.

[BWT]

Right now in FL we have a few experimental programs going. Most of them involve harvesting the understory plants and baling them. They were baling 150 tons of titi and acre in one of the swamps. Since we're always looking for a way to reduce the flashy fuels in these areas this seems like a good way to go, especially when you consider the volatility of these plant types. The main worry is removing nutrients from the site and a suitable rotation for this. There's also some whole tree chipping going for fuel, and I know of at least one paper mill that runs completely off wastewood.

[PAFaller]

Thats pretty cool, I have been in some managed southern forests when I took a cross country road trip the summer after I graduated college, but never worked down there. I know fire fighter friends of mine have mentioned that high level of flashy fuel duff layer those stands get, so I guess a market for that is a good thing. They are worried about nutrient depletion here too, and the state has a 60 page book on biomass BMPs. Scary thing that many loggers are arguing is that they spent countless hours and dollars writing up this biomass BMP book, but during a regular sawlog harvest very little of these BMPs are followed. They have protocols for the amount of seed and mast trees that need to be left, the recommendation of a written management plan ect. Seems the state guys want to use it as a rulebook but then not have any enforcement folks on the ground. On top of that much of the biomass will be coming out of forests that were high graded and have little timber of any value left, and should have been clear cut and allowed to start over.

[woodtroll]

BMP's
I have a hard time with more rules. Whether for saw log harvesting or biomass production. (why should they be different?)
I do not mind suggestions. We have enough rules. It should be Do a good job, protect your resources.
My libertarian roots are showing. I better go lay down.

[Randy88]

 I'm trying to expand the learning curve but I've read some articles about buring boimass at some schools and universities and hospitals and they showcased one in the carolinas that I stumbled across on the web and its been up and running for about 12 years and all they did was brag on how cheap of a system if was and how their payback was in X amount of years and it was the greatest thing since sliced bread.   They had it paid off in no time and has been running faultlessly ever since.

The reason I ask is if its so good and cheap and the right thing to do why don't they pay more for the fuel material and expand this idea elsewhere so it is profitable for those involved instead of just cheap for the facility thats burning bio.    Maybe I'm seeing everyting wrong and misunderstood it but thats the way it was presented to me by the article I read.   St Paul Minnesota has a system to burn bio too that I read online and their story was the same about cheap costs and payback was in just a few years time and the system would last for decades and it was a tremendous savings and I think or at least the impression the article gave was its saving millions.   Then in posts here the suppliers are complaining the costs to process bio and truck it are more than what they get paid.   I must be either completely lost on the issue or the media isn't protraying whats actually going on.

Be kind and be gently but help educate the stupid [me] and tell me whats missing or has been omited from what I've got out of it, because the way things are looking to me and most I've talked to is someones getting a real cheap fuel source and others are getting taken advantage of big time to process it and deliver it. 


The next question I have will really raise a few feathers,  I've grown up in and around the woods most of my life to some extent,  my greatgrand parents had 20 plus acres of timber almost 100 years ago and its still in the family today.   I've watched things over my lifetime and have seen pictures from years gone by and listened to whats happened to the timber over the years and yes I'm in line to own it next.   Before our family ever owned it, it was always used for saw logs and firewood and back in the day everyone burned wood and needed the lumber for building in our family anyhow.   The question is what does it hurt to remove all the material either in logs, firewood or chips and have a timber thats as neat as a pin.   My grandpa was a stickler for using everything and no tree was cut unless virtually every piece was used for something and cleaned up and thats the way it was for almost 70 years and thats how our family got it, the ones before did the same thing.   I know ideas and trends change along with everything else in life and what I"m asking is will the timber suffer from removing everything but the stump because as of yet I'd say no if its managed right, or am I still in the thinking from the past??   Over the years disease has taken its toll and the butternuts and elms and others have been replaced with walnut, cherry, maple, ash, and more oak both red and white.

[madhatte]

Where I work, we have lots of piles and super-restrictive prescribed burn policy.  We just found a biomass guy to chip our piles, and at this time are just giving it to him.  Maybe he'll have to pay for it someday, depending on the market, but for now we're just happy to be able to keep our fuels under control. 

EDIT:  OH!  Just noticed this:

http://www.forestryforum.com/board/index.php/topic,36837.0.html

I suspect that our "biomass" projects are a corporate stab at those Gov't dollars. 

[Ron Scott]

ENGINEERING MATTERS

As I've had it explained, production size is a huge issue when producing ethanol, or most any other project on a commercial scale.  In this case, small operations have been running on ethanol for a century.  While it may be relatively easy to produce ethanol for a personal vehicle, the engineering changes dramatically when trying to produce ethanol for millions of vehicles.  Typically, a process is proven in a lab.  From there, a pilot plant is constructed, followed by a demo-sized plant, and then a full-scale economy-of-scale commercial facility. 

The world has yet to see a commercial-sized ethanol production facility.   The planned Macoma plant in the EUP is in the race to be first. 

The process to be used for the Mascoma plant has been proven in the lab, engineered into a pilot facility, and (as of February this year) has been ramped-up to a demo facility that can produce 200,000 gallons per year.  Both the pilot and demo facility are in New York state.  The commercial-sized plant in the EUP is to produce about 40 million gallons of ethanol from wood.  By comparison, Michigan consumes about 200 million gallons of gasoline each year.  Also by comparison, the wood needed to produce 40 million gallons of ethanol would be about a million cubic meters, or about 1/25 of the annual growth. 

[woodtroll]

Ron is right on. We have a plant here that is in the pilot stage. They always seem to be ready to go commercial but have not yet. But they sure do ask for the grant $$$.
Instead of replacing gas, aren't they just trying to replace some of the additives? or just a % of the final product?

[Ron Scott]

BC Plant to Use Trees Killed By Pine Beetles

According to Biomass Magazine, a proposed biomass power plant near Hanceville, British Columbia, Canada, will run on trees killed by mountain pine beetles. Plans for the $260 million 60-megawatt plant in the Cariboo Chilcotin were developed through a partnership between Western Biomass Power Corporation and Tsilhqot’in National Government. It is one of many proposals vying for a place in the Bioenergy Call for Power, a program to provide British Columbia with clean energy and diversify rural economies.

For more information, visit the Biomass Magazine website.

E-Forester