Premium
Cost and profit impacts of modifying stover harvest operations to improve feedstock quality
Author(s) -
Langholtz Matthew,
Eaton Laurence,
Davis Maggie,
Hartley Damon,
Brandt Craig,
Hilliard Michael
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
biofuels, bioproducts and biorefining
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.931
H-Index - 83
eISSN - 1932-1031
pISSN - 1932-104X
DOI - 10.1002/bbb.2005
Subject(s) - stover , corn stover , raw material , profit (economics) , revenue , agricultural science , net profit , agricultural engineering , environmental science , acre , agricultural economics , pulp and paper industry , economics , mathematics , waste management , engineering , biofuel , microeconomics , statistics , chemistry , field experiment , accounting , organic chemistry
Biomass quality attributes, and the potential tractability of those attributes, are key to a successful biomass feedstock supply chain, in addition to quantity and price. Modifying harvest operations is one potential approach to managing biomass feedstock quality for corn stover. For example, eliminating raking from stover harvest operations is proposed as an approach to reduce ash content. However, changes in the stover harvest configuration cause changes in per acre profits, per ton costs, and available supply at specified prices. Here we evaluate sensitivity of profit, cost, and supply to conversion from a three‐pass to a two‐pass stover harvesting configuration as a means to reduce ash content. For all simulated yields, harvest costs are $2–$3 per ton cheaper for three‐pass versus two‐pass systems wherever residue retention coefficients are less than 0.5, and per ton costs for both systems increase dramatically where residue retention coefficients are greater than 0.7. Per acre net returns are greater under all simulated yields wherever residue sustainability retention coefficients are less than 0.6. Under these conditions, farmers lose between $13 and $49 per acre by harvesting with a two‐pass rather than a three‐pass system. Where competing with stover markets with less stringent quality specifications, meeting ash targets by harvesting with a two‐pass system may require higher grower payments of the order of $9–$25 per ton to make up for the per acre lost revenue. When solving for the least‐cost supply, agronomic simulations suggest about 2/3 of stover is harvested with a three‐pass system. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd