Harvesting techniques for non-industrial SRF biomass plantations on farmland

The goal of this study was to compare the technical and economic performance of terrain chipping and roadside chipping, applied to short rotation biomass plantations. The null hypothesis was that no significant difference are in the performance of the two work systems, when applied to short rotation coppices. Those systems especially designed for non-industrial SRF plantations, were used for conventional logging operations. The difference on the above mentioned systems consisted especially in the chipping location: chipping was performed directly to the field (containers reach the chipper in the field) or at the field’s edge (roadside chipping). Both systems were tested on two of the most common SRF poplar clones in Italy, namely: AF2 and Monviso. Plots were allocated randomly to the two treatment levels ( roadside or field chipping) than blocked for two main clone types ( AF2 and Monviso ) so that each of the 4 treatments level and clone types has a minimum repetition plot of 6 times (total of 24 replications). The Plot were identified with paint markings at the stump so each plot area could be identified at the ground. Net weight of each charge was obtained by a certified weighbridge, so each plot has its own productivity in terms of weight and time consumption. Results were encouraging: harvesting cost varied from 16.3 to 23.2 􀀔 tonne-1, and was lower for terrain chipping and for the most productive clone (Monviso). Despite its higher cost, roadside chipping was preferred for its better terrain capability and for the superior storage quality of uncomminuted biomass. Both systems were suboptimal in their current configurations. They could offer a better performance, subject to minor improvements.

[1]  R. Ceulemans,et al.  Production physiology and growth potential of poplars under short-rotation forestry culture , 1999 .

[2]  Raffaele Spinelli,et al.  Comparison of short-wood forwarding systems used in Iberia , 2004 .

[3]  T. Verwijst,et al.  Willow coppice systems in short rotation forestry: Effects of plant spacing, rotation length and clonal composition on biomass production , 1993 .

[4]  M. Manzone,et al.  Energetic and economic evaluation of a poplar cultivation for the biomass production in Italy. , 2009 .

[5]  Natascia Magagnotti,et al.  Biomass harvesting from buffer strips in Italy: three options compared , 2006, Agroforestry Systems.

[6]  M. Proe,et al.  Effects of spacing, species and coppicing on leaf area, light interception and photosynthesis in short rotation forestry , 2002 .

[7]  Raffaele Spinelli,et al.  Recovering sawlogs from pulpwood-size plantation cottonwood , 2008 .

[8]  Reinhart Ceulemans,et al.  Energy and greenhouse gas balance of bioenergy production from poplar and willow: a review , 2011 .

[9]  T. Volk,et al.  Energy feedstock characteristics of willow and hybrid poplar clones at harvest age. , 2003 .

[10]  S. Pallardy,et al.  Biomass production by two-year-old poplar clones on floodplain sites in the Lower Midwest, USA , 2003, Agroforestry Systems.

[11]  Bo Dahlin,et al.  Cut-To-Length: The Next Decade , 2013 .

[12]  Bruce R. Hartsough,et al.  Harvesting SRF poplar for pulpwood: Experience in the Pacific Northwest , 2006 .

[13]  Theo Verwijst,et al.  Above-ground biomass assessments and first cutting cycle production in willow (Salix sp.) coppice¿a comparison between destructive and non-destructive methods , 2004 .

[14]  Karl Stampfer,et al.  Tree-length system evaluation of second thinning in a loblolly pine plantation , 2003 .

[15]  R. Gifford,et al.  Soil carbon stocks and land use change: a meta analysis , 2002 .

[16]  R. Ceulemans,et al.  Growth and production of a short rotation coppice culture of poplar I. Clonal differences in leaf characteristics in relation to biomass production , 2004 .

[17]  Matthew J. Aylott,et al.  Greenhouse gas emissions from four bioenergy crops in England and Wales: Integrating spatial estimates of yield and soil carbon balance in life cycle analyses , 2009 .

[18]  C. Patrick Doncaster,et al.  Potential benefits of commercial willow Short Rotation Coppice (SRC) for farm-scale plant and invertebrate communities in the agri-environment , 2011 .

[19]  J. G. Isebrands,et al.  Short-rotation woody crops and phytoremediation: Opportunities for agroforestry? , 2004, Agroforestry Systems.

[20]  M. Weih.  Short rotation forestry (SRF) on agricultural land and its possibilities for sustainable energy supply , 2008 .

[21]  W. A. Kenney,et al.  A review of biomass quality research relevant to the use of poplar and willow for energy conversion , 1990 .

[22]  R. Sage,et al.  Short rotation coppice for energy: towards ecological guidelines , 1998 .

[23]  Shane Ward,et al.  Effect of Working Conditions on Forwarder Productivity in Cut-to-length Timber Harvesting on Sensitive Forest Sites in Ireland , 2004 .

[24]  Natascia Magagnotti,et al.  Upsized Harvesting Technology for Coping with the New Trends in Short-Rotation Coppice , 2011 .

[25]  Raffaele Spinelli,et al.  A harvest and transport cost model for Eucalyptus spp. fast-growing short rotation plantations. , 2009 .

[26]  Gu Lb,et al.  Soil carbon stocks and land use change : a meta analysis , 2022 .

[27]  Anders Grönlund,et al.  Assessing the role of the harvester within the forestry-wood chain , 2001 .

[28]  Matthew A. Holtzscher,et al.  Tree diameter effects on cost and productivity of cut-to-length systems , 1997 .

[29]  Natascia Magagnotti,et al.  Performance of a mobile mechanical screen to improve the commercial quality of wood chips for energy. , 2011, Bioresource technology.

[30]  Raffaele Spinelli,et al.  Analyzing and Estimating Delays in Harvester Operations , 2008 .

[31]  M. Weih,et al.  Above-ground Woody Biomass Production of Short-rotation Populus Plantations on Agricultural Land in Sweden , 2003 .

[32]  R. Heyduck,et al.  Hybrid poplar (Populus ssp.) selections for arid and semi-arid intermountain regions of the western United States , 2010, Agroforestry Systems.

[33]  Natascia Magagnotti,et al.  Using modified foragers to harvest short-rotation poplar plantations , 2009 .

[34]  Natascia Magagnotti,et al.  A tool for productivity and cost forecasting of decentralised wood chipping , 2010 .

[35]  V. R. Tolbert,et al.  Comparing Soil Carbon of Short Rotation Poplar Plantations with Agricultural Crops and Woodlots in North Central United States , 2004 .

[36]  Rien Visser,et al.  Analyzing and estimating delays in wood chipping operations. , 2009 .

[37]  Wim Turkenburg,et al.  Exploration of the ranges of the global potential of biomass for energy , 2003 .

[38]  U. Tschirner,et al.  Fiber length and pulping characteristics of switchgrass, alfalfa stems, hybrid poplar and willow biomasses. , 2010, Bioresource technology.

[39]  S. Jose,et al.  Biomass production potential of three short rotation woody crop species under varying nitrogen and water availability , 2010, Agroforestry Systems.

[40]  D. W. Einspahr,et al.  Wood and Paper Properties of Vacuum Airlift Segregated Juvenile Poplar Whole-Tree Chips , 2007 .

[41]  Sara González-García,et al.  Environmental impacts of forest production and supply of pulpwood: Spanish and Swedish case studies , 2009 .

[42]  N. Magagnotti,et al.  Work quality and veneer value recovery of mechanised and manual log-making in Italian poplar plantations , 2011, European Journal of Forest Research.

[43]  M. Londo,et al.  Willow short-rotation coppice in multiple land-use systems: evaluation of four combination options in the Dutch context , 2004 .

[44]  Anders Roos,et al.  Retreat from Salix - Swedish experience with energy crops in the 1990s , 2006 .