Small Landowner Production of Pellets from Green, Beetle-Killed, and Burned Lodgepole Pine
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Materials
2.2. Experimental Design
2.3. Pellet Analysis
2.4. Statistical Analysis
3. Results and Discussion
3.1. Pellet Properties
3.2. Particle Density
3.3. Mechanical Durability
3.4. Chemical Composition and Calorific Value
3.5. Ash Content
3.6. Anticipated Fuel Yield of Base
3.7. Machine Rate
4. Conclusions
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Hosegood, S.; Leitch, M.; Shahi, C.; Pulkki, R. Moisture and energy content of fire-burnt trees for bioenergy production: A case study of four tree species from northwestern Ontario. For. Chron. 2011, 87, 42–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- USDA Forest Services FHTET Pest Portal. Available online: https://foresthealth.fs.usda.gov/portal/ (accessed on 1 October 2015).
- Government of Canada Mountain Pine Beetle (Factsheet). Available online: http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/forests/fire-insects-disturbances/top-insects/13397 (accessed on 5 March 2018).
- Bogdanski, B.; Sun, L.; Peter, B.; Stennes, B. Markets for Forest Products Following a Large Disturbance: Opportunities and Challenges from the Mountain Pine Beetle Outbreak in Western Canada—Information Report; Canadian Forest Service Publications: Victoria, BC, Canada, 2011; ISBN 9781100182865. [Google Scholar]
- Collins, B.J.; Rhoades, C.C.; Battaglia, M.A.; Hubbard, R.M. The effects of bark beetle outbreaks on forest development, fuel loads and potential fire behavior in salvage logged and untreated lodgepole pine forests. For. Ecol. Manag. 2012, 284, 260–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, A.; Gallagher, T.; Mitchell, D.; O’Neal, B. Application of a Small-Scale Equipment System for Biomass Harvesting. Small Scale For. 2017, 16, 133–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Taylor, S.W.; Carroll, A.L. Mountain Pine Beetle Symposium: Challenges and Solutions BC-X-399; Canadian Forest Service Publications: Victoria, BC, Canada, 2004; ISBN 0662383893. [Google Scholar]
- Cole, W.E.; Amman, G.D. Mountain Pine Beetle Dynamics in Lodgepole Pine Forests Part 1: Course of an Infectation; INT-89; United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service: Washington, DC, USA, 1980; pp. 1–63.
- Watson, P.; Potter, S. Burned wood in the pulp and paper industry: A literature review. For. Chron. 2004, 80, 473–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mackes, K.; Jennings, C. Evaluating the heating value of fire-killed ponderosa pine trees in Colorado. For. Prod. J. 2008, 58, 53–55. [Google Scholar]
- Barrette, J.; Thiffault, E.; Paré, D. Salvage harvesting of fire-killed stands in Northern Quebec: Analysis of bioenergy and ecological potentials and constraints. J. Sci. Technol. For. Prod. Process. 2013, 3, 16–25. [Google Scholar]
- Jacobson, R.A.; Keefe, R.F.; Smith, A.M.S.; Metlen, S.; Saul, D.A.; Newman, S.M.; Laninga, T.J.; Inman, D. Multi-spatial analysis of forest residue utilization for bioenergy. Biofuels Bioprod. Biorefin. 2016, 10, 560–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Oswalt, S.; Thompson, M.; Smith, W.B. U.S. Forest Resource Facts and Historical Trends; FS-801, 60, FS-1035; United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2014.
- Newman, S.; Saul, D.; Keefe, R.; Jacobson, R.; Laninga, T.; Moroney, J. “The Devil Is in the Details”: Inland Northwest Stakeholders’ Views on Three Forest-Based Bioenergy Scenarios. For. Sci. 2017, 63, 614–620. [Google Scholar]
- Keefe, R.; Anderson, N.; Hogland, J.; Muhlenfeld, K. Woody Biomass Logistics. Cellul. Energy Crop. Syst. 2014, 251–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Filbakk, T.; Jirjis, R.; Nurmi, J.; Høibø, O. The effect of bark content on quality parameters of Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris L.) pellets. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35, 3342–3349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Melin, S. Bark as Feedstock for Production of Wood Pellets; Wood Pellet Association of Canada: Revelstoke, BC, Canada, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Rhén, C.; Öhman, M.; Gref, R.; Wästerlund, I. Effect of raw material composition in woody biomass pellets on combustion characteristics. Biomass Bioenergy 2007, 31, 66–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Öhman, M.; Boman, C.; Hedman, H.; Nordin, A.; Boström, D. Slagging tendencies of wood pellet ash during combustion in residential pellet burners. Biomass Bioenergy 2004, 27, 585–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lehtikangas, P. Quality properties of pelletised saw dust, lgging residues and bark. Biomass Bioenergy 2001, 20, 351–360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nurmi, J. Heating values of the above ground biomass of small-sized trees. Acta For. Fenn. 1993, 236, 1–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nurmi, J. Heating Values of Mature Trees. Acta For. Fenn. 1997, 256, 1–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obernberger, I.; Thek, G. Physical characterisation and chemical composition of densified biomass fuels with regard to their combustion behaviour. Biomass Bioenergy 2004, 27, 653–669. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Toscano, G.; Riva, G.; Foppa Pedretti, E.; Corinaldesi, F.; Mengarelli, C.; Duca, D. Investigation on wood pellet quality and relationship between ash content and the most important chemical elements. Biomass Bioenergy 2013, 56, 317–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bradfield, J.; Levi, M. Effect of species and wood to bark ratio on pelleting of Southern woods. For. Prod. J. 1984, 34, 61–63. [Google Scholar]
- Zaini, P.; Sokansanj, S.; Bi, X.; Lim, C.J.; Mani, S.; Melin, S.; Kadla, J. Density, heating value, and composition of pellets made from lodgepole pine (Pinus concorta Douglas) infested with mountain pine beetle (Dendroctonus ponderosae hopkins). Can. Biosyst. Eng. 2008, 50, 3.47–3.55. [Google Scholar]
- Woo, K.L.; Watson, P.; Mansfield, S.D. The effects of mountain pine beetle attack on lodgepole pine wood morphology and chemistry: Implications for wood and fiber quality. Wood Fiber Sci. 2005, 37, 112–126. [Google Scholar]
- Lewis, K.; Hartley, I. Rate of deterioration, degrade, and fall of trees killed by mountain pine beetle. J. Ecosyst. Manag. 2006, 7, 11–19. [Google Scholar]
- Trent, T.; Lawrence, V.; Woo, K. A Wood and Fibre Quality-Deterioration Model for Mountain Pine Beetle-Killed Trees by Biogeoclimatic Subzone; Canadian Forest Service Publications: Victoria, BC, Canada, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Bushnell, D.J. Bıomass Fuel Charecterization: Testing and Evaluating the Combustion Characteristics of Selected Bıomass Fuels; U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information: Oak Ridge, TN, USA, 1989.
- Arshadi, M.; Gref, R.; Geladi, P.; Dahlqvist, S.A.; Lestander, T. The influence of raw material characteristics on the industrial pelletizing process and pellet quality. Fuel Process. Technol. 2008, 89, 1442–1447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carone, M.T.; Pantaleo, A.; Pellerano, A. Influence of process parameters and biomass characteristics on the durability of pellets from the pruning residues of Olea europaea L. Biomass Bioenergy 2011, 35, 402–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rhén, C.; Gref, R.; Sjöström, M.; Wästerlund, I. Effects of raw material moisture content, densification pressure and temperature on some properties of Norway spruce pellets. Fuel Process. Technol. 2005, 87, 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mani, S.; Tabil, L.G.; Sokhansanj, S. Effects of compressive force, particle size and moisture content on mechanical properties of biomass pellets from grasses. Biomass Bioenergy 2006, 30, 648–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gaitán-Alvarez, J.; Moya, R.; Puente-Urbina, A.; Rodriguez-Zuñiga, A. Physical and Compression Properties of Pellets Manufactured with the Biomass of Five Woody Tropical Species of Costa Rica Torrefied at Different Temperatures and Times. Energies 2017, 10, 1205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaliyan, N.; Morey, R.V. Natural binders and solid bridge type binding mechanisms in briquettes and pellets made from corn stover and switchgrass. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 1082–1090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kaliyan, N.; Vance Morey, R. Factors affecting strength and durability of densified biomass products. Biomass Bioenergy 2009, 33, 337–359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larsson, S.H.; Thyrel, M.; Geladi, P.; Lestander, T.A. High quality biofuel pellet production from pre-compacted low density raw materials. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 7176–7182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Paulrud, S. Upgraded Biofuels—Effects of Quality on Processing, Handling Characteristics, Combustion and Ash melting; Swedish University: Umea, Sweden, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- PFI Pellet Fuels Institute Standard Specification for Residential/Commercial Densified Fuel. Available online: http://www.pelletheat.org/assets/docs/2015/Standards/standard%20specification%20july%209%202015.pdf (accessed on 1 February 2016).
- Miyata, E.S. Determining Fixed and Operating Costs of Logging Equipment; General Technical Report NC-55; United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service: Washington, DC, USA, 1980; pp. 1–20.
- Brinker, R.; Miller, D.; Stokes, B.; Lanford, B. Machine Rates for Selected Forest Harvesting Machines; Circular 296; Alabama Agriculture Experimental Station: Auburn, AL, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Schmidt, O. Wood and Tree Fungi: Biology, Damage, Protection, and Use; Springer: Hamburg, Germany, 2006; ISBN 9783540321392. [Google Scholar]
- Moore, D. Fungal Biology in the Origin and Emergence of Life; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2013. [Google Scholar]
- Rayner, A.D.M.; Boddy, L. Fungal Decomposition of WOod. Its Biology and Ecology; John Wiley & Sons Ltd.: Chichester, UK, 1988; ISBN 0471103101. [Google Scholar]
- Leckner, B.; Karlsson, M. Gaseous emissions from circulating fluidized bed combustion of wood. Biomass Bioenergy 1993, 4, 379–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Obernberger, I.; Brunner, T.; Barnthaler, G. Chemical properties of solid biofuels-significance and impact. Biomass Bioenergy 2006, 30, 973–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Becker, R.M.; Keefe, R.F.; Anderson, N.M. Use of real-time GNSS-RF Data to characterize the swing movements of forestry equipment. Forests 2017, 8, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Saralecos, J.D.; Keefe, R.F.; Tinkham, W.T.; Brooks, R.H.; Smith, A.M.S.; Johnson, L.R. Effects of harvesting systems and bole moisture loss on weight scaling of douglas-fir sawlogs (Pseudotsuga Menziesii var. glauca Franco). Forests 2014, 5, 2289–2306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
G 1 | BK 2 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
N 3 | B 4 | N | B | ||||
Bark On | Bark Off | Bark On | Bark Off | Bark On | Bark Off | Bark On | Bark Off |
Assortment | g/n/on | g/b/on | bk/n/on | bk/b/on | g/n/off | g/b/off | bk/n/off | bk/b/off |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Diameter (mm) | 6.14 | 6.16 | 6.14 | 6.09 | 6.09 | 6.10 | 6.08 | 6.09 |
Density (kg/dm3) | 1.16 | 1.13 | 1.12 | 1.15 | 1.19 | 1.16 | 1.12 | 1.20 |
Summary | Factor | Interaction | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Beetle | Fire | Bark | Beetle-Fire | Beetle-Bark | Fire-Bark | Beetle-Fire-Bark | |
Degrees of freedom | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
Durability | |||||||
Sum Sq | 12.002 | 19.976 | 22.956 | 0.55 | 16.216 | 9.784 | 13.578 |
F value | 42.907 | 71.415 | 82.065 | 1.965 | 57.973 | 34.979 | 48.541 |
p (>F) | 6.68×10−6 | 2.70×10−7 | 1.07×10−7 | 0.18 | 1.05×10−6 | 2.18×10−5 | 3.17×10−6 |
Significance | *** | *** | *** | - | *** | *** | *** |
Heating Value | |||||||
Sum Sq | 0.1305 | 0.1751 | 0.0092 | 0.0003 | 0.0176 | 0.0063 | 0.242 |
F value | 20.147 | 27.026 | 1.421 | 0.052 | 2.717 | 0.978 | 37.351 |
p (>F) | 0.000372 | 8.79×10−5 | 0.250687 | 0.822357 | 0.118776 | 0.337381 | 1.50×10−5 |
Significance | *** | *** | - | - | - | - | *** |
Carbon | |||||||
Sum Sq | 1.485 | 1.898 | 7.583 | 0.002 | 0.32 | 3.565 | 0.008 |
F value | 1.56 | 1.994 | 7.965 | 0.002 | 0.336 | 3.745 | 0.009 |
p (>F) | 0.2296 | 0.177 | 0.0123 | 0.9622 | 0.5703 | 0.0708 | 0.9262 |
Significance | - | - | * | - | - | - | - |
Hydrogen | |||||||
Sum Sq | 0.0067 | 0.132 | 0.5521 | 0.3651 | 0.0121 | 0.1473 | 0.0988 |
F value | 0.113 | 2.229 | 9.322 | 6.164 | 0.205 | 2.487 | 1.669 |
p (>F) | 0.74159 | 0.15488 | 0.00759 | 0.02451 | 0.65667 | 0.13437 | 0.21479 |
Significance | - | - | ** | * | - | - | - |
Fuel Yield | |||||||
Sum Sq | 0.00168 | 0.000247 | 0.00226 | 0.00004 | 0.000135 | 0.00026 | 0.000287 |
F value | 8.2 | 1.203 | 11.019 | 0.195 | 0.659 | 1.267 | 1.398 |
p (>F) | 0.01126 | 0.28889 | 0.00434 | 0.66466 | 0.42868 | 0.27699 | 0.2543 |
Significance | * | - | ** | - | - | - | - |
Group | MC * (% d.b) | CV ** (MJ/kg) | Ash (%) | VM *** (%) | Fixed Carbon | C (%) | H (%) | N (%) | S (%) | O (%) | Lignin (% Dry) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
g/n/on | 2.51 | 20.69 | 0.30 | 81.33 | 18.37 | 50.49 | 5.86 | 0.34 | 0.12 | 42.89 | 28.4 |
g/b/on | 5.47 | 20.29 | 0.39 | 82.68 | 16.93 | 50.45 | 5.73 | 0.31 | 0.10 | 42.80 | 28.2 |
bk/n/on | 2.60 | 20.59 | 0.37 | 81.48 | 18.15 | 49.75 | 5.82 | 0.36 | 0.09 | 43.62 | 27.4 |
bk/b/on | 1.65 | 20.57 | 0.35 | 81.21 | 18.43 | 49.97 | 5.93 | 0.32 | 0.11 | 43.32 | 27.8 |
g/n/off | 2.69 | 20.36 | 0.35 | 81.90 | 17.75 | 52.12 | 5.57 | 0.25 | 0.06 | 41.64 | 28.8 |
g/b/off | 3.57 | 20.43 | 0.32 | 81.69 | 17.99 | 50.84 | 5.50 | 0.21 | 0.06 | 43.06 | 27.9 |
bk/n/off | 3.49 | 20.77 | 0.33 | 81.49 | 18.18 | 51.91 | 5.18 | 0.23 | 0.07 | 42.28 | 29.0 |
bk/b/off | 2.52 | 20.43 | 0.27 | 81.30 | 18.43 | 50.52 | 5.86 | 0.28 | 0.11 | 42.97 | 27.2 |
Cost | Tractor-Mounted Felling Head | Tractor and Forwarder Trailer | Debarker | Chipper | Hammer Mill | Pellet Mill |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Purchase price ($) | $75,000 | $125,000 | $11,500 | $16,295 | $4000 | $4800 |
Ownership costs | ||||||
Interest Cost ($/year) | $5100 | $8500 | $782 | $1108 | $272 | $480 |
Tax Cost ($/year) | $2040 | $3400 | $313 | $443 | $109 | $131 |
Yearly Ownership Cost ($/year) | $19,140 | $31,900 | $2935 | $4158 | $1021 | $1225 |
Ownership cost per SMH * ($/h) | $9.57 | $15.95 | $1.47 | $2.08 | $0.51 | $0.61 |
Ownership cost per PMH ** ($/h) | $11.96 | $19.94 | $1.96 | $3.65 | $0.85 | $0.85 |
Operating costs | ||||||
Fuel Cost ($/h) | $6 | $6 | $3 | $3 | $2 | $1 |
Lube Cost ($/h) | $2.32 | $2.20 | $1.16 | $1.16 | $0.56 | $0.20 |
Repair and Maintenance ($/h) | $5.63 | $3.75 | $1.10 | $2.29 | $0.53 | $0.53 |
Operating Cost per PMH ($/h) | $14 | $12 | $5 | $7 | $3 | $1 |
Operating Cost per SMH ($/h) | $11.41 | $9.53 | $4.07 | $3.77 | $1.56 | $0.93 |
Yearly Operating Cost ($/year) | $22,823 | $19,067 | $8138 | $7539 | $3121 | $1850 |
Labor costs | ||||||
Operator Labor Cost ($/year) | $33,600 | $33,600 | $33,600 | $33,600 | $33,600 | $33,600 |
Total costs | ||||||
Total costs per SMH ($/h) | $37.78 | $42.28 | $22.34 | $22.65 | $18.87 | $18.34 |
Total costs per PMH ($/h) | $47.23 | $52.85 | $29.78 | $39.73 | $31.45 | $25.47 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Qin, X.; Keefe, R.F.; Daugaard, D.E. Small Landowner Production of Pellets from Green, Beetle-Killed, and Burned Lodgepole Pine. Energies 2018, 11, 648. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11030648
Qin X, Keefe RF, Daugaard DE. Small Landowner Production of Pellets from Green, Beetle-Killed, and Burned Lodgepole Pine. Energies. 2018; 11(3):648. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11030648
Chicago/Turabian StyleQin, Xuexian, Robert F. Keefe, and Daren E. Daugaard. 2018. "Small Landowner Production of Pellets from Green, Beetle-Killed, and Burned Lodgepole Pine" Energies 11, no. 3: 648. https://doi.org/10.3390/en11030648