Demonstration and Commercial Production of Biomass for Energy

Lynn L. Wright, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, P.O. Box 2008, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-6422

From the Proceedings, Second Biomass Conference of the Americas: Energy, Environment, Agriculture, and Industry; pages 1-10. Meeting held August 21-24, 1995, Portland, Oregon; published by National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado.

Five years ago, environmentally benign biomass crop technologies were only beginning to be commercialized and they were being used for products other than fuels. Twenty organizations could be identified in the U.S. and Canada that had plantings of at least 20 ha in size or greater of short-rotation woody crops and of those 12 were established by forest products companies. All commercial activity was with woody crops since herbaceous crops were still be evaluated by the DOE program. In the intervening 5 years, significant progress has been made on identifying the potential of a herbaceous crop, switchgrass, as an environmentally desirable and highly productive potential energy feedstock. The recent harvest and use of hybrid poplars for pulp and paper production have clearly demonstrated the value of genetically superior hybrid poplar clones. Significant progress has been made in developing sophisticated techniques which will enable even more improvement of hybrid poplars for a variety of locations. Interest is emerging from the forest products industry in all parts of the country regarding the potential of short-rotation woody crops. While the primary use of commercially planted woody crops continues to be for pulp and paper, energy is a co-product in nearly all situations. Additionally, some serious consideration is being given to the economics of using woody and/or herbaceous crops for a variety of energy production processes. Feasibility studies have or are being conducted by 10 or more groups around the country and several serious proposals for biomass energy demonstrations have recently be received by the Department of Energy in response to a solicitation for cost-shared demonstration projects. There continue to be numerous constraints to the commercialization of biomass crops for energy without federal assistance or policy modifications. The success of research and demonstrations over the next 5 years will be key to determining the rate of adoption of biomass energy technologies in the United States.

The U.S. Department of Energy initiated biomass energy research in 1978, viewing it as a viable alternative to fossil fuel and has focused on strategies to implement biomass energy if sources of fossil fuels became unavailable. While the fuel shortages foreseen in the 1970's have not materialized, environmental concerns associated with fossil fuel use are increasingly important, the potential for creating jobs in rural areas has been recognized, and the possibility of assisting the farm economy even while reducing farm subsidies is being considered. Consequently the federal government has pursued biomass energy research and is now attempting to bring it to an integrated demonstration phase so that the benefits of biomass energy systems can be fully explored and documented (DOE, 1994). Meanwhile forest products companies have recognized that supplies of wood in some regions of the country are beginning to be limited and that the production of fast-growing trees crops may have economic advantages (Arnold 1995, American Forest and Paper Association, 1994). A surge of interest from several forest products companies is resulting in numerous new trials being established for evaluation and the consideration of techniques such as irrigation that have normally been considered too expensive for energy. This paper briefly summarizes the demonstrations and commercial biomass crop activity that is occurring the U.S. and Canada and the barriers that remain relative to using biomass crops for energy. The paper further discusses the implications of these activities relative to the potential for biomass crops to contribute to energy demands in the U.S. in the near future.

The demonstration and commercialization of herbaceous crops for energy is only beginning though many of the candidate crops have been grown for other purposes for 10's to 100's of years. For example, sugarcane has been grown commercially for the production of sugar for decades. The commercial production of this, or similar crops for energy, would be very, if not exactly similar to the methods and technologies currently used. While new varieties selected specifically for high yield might be substituted if the crops are fully dedicated to energy, it is likely that the co-production of sugar and electricity (from the sugarcane bagasse) will continue to be more economically viable in the near future. Annual crops such as rapeseed and soybeans are being used to produce biodiesel, a diesel fuel substitute. Corn grain is being used on a significant scale in the production of ethanol. Alfalfa, a major forage crop, has the potential for use as an energy crop when utilized in a co-product mode with the nutrient rich leafy part of the crop being used as an animal feed and the stems being used as the energy resource. Perennial grasses, the herbaceous crops which appear most likely to be included in a dedicated feedstock supply system (DFSS) for an energy facility are the focus of this article.

Switchgrass, one of many perennial grass species, was selected in 1990 by the Department of Energy's Biofuels Feedstock Development Program as a model species deserving further research and development. This selection was based on the results of screening trials in the Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, and Great Plains regions. Yields in the early screening trials were not particularly high, ranging from 2-14 dry Mg/ha/yr, but switchgrass tended to stand out, particularly during the dryer years. A select variety of switchgrass, Alamo, produced as much as 34 dry Mg/ha in one year in one location. A limited switchgrass breeding effort was initiated for switchgrass in the North Central region in 1990 and a second, more comprehensive breeding and selection program was initiated for switchgrass in the South in 1992. Field trials of available varieties were initiated at three institutions (and 15 locations) in the south in 1992. Third year results from those trials are showing average yields of the best varieties in the range of 15 to 17 dry Mg/ha and maximum yields of 20 to 27 dry Mg/ha.

Switchgrass is commercially grown in the sense that it has been planted widely in many part of the U.S. as forage and was one of the several perennial grasses used to satisfy the requirements for lands placed in the Conservation Reserve Program during the past 10 years. For example at least 36,400 ha were planted on CRP land in the green hills area of Missouri and at least 7,200 ha were switchgrass (McLaughlin, ORNL, personal communication). Farmers in Alabama and Texas have planted the select variety, Alamo, on the order of at least a few hundred acres as a forage crop.

Serious consideration of producing switchgrass in a DFSS is being pursued in the Chariton Valley area of Iowa, in Kansas, and in Alabama. Potential energy end-users and potential producers or representatives of producers populations are engaged in developing business plans for the potential production of energy from switchgrass in those locations. In Iowa, the candidate conversion technology is co-firing with coal to produce electricity, in Kansas the candidate technology is fast pyrolysis to produce a biocrude oil and in Alabama, it is a gasification technology serving as a precursor to an ethanol production system. Individuals or groups of other areas of the U.S. such as Wisconsin, Nebraska, and Pennsylvania have expressed interest in the use of switchgrass for energy but it is not known whether the interest has evolved into actual feasibility studies.

The first large scale trials of the SRWC concept actually occurred in the mid to late 70's and early 80's. Several northern pulp and paper companies and other private groups established trials of hybrid poplars on the order of 5 to 200 ha in the North Central and Northeastern portions of the U.S. and in eastern Canada. Several southern pulp and paper companies also began the establishment of several thousand hectares of sweetgum, sycamore and cottonwoods during the same time period (Wright 1990). Many of these plantings either failed or are not currently categorized as short-rotation since the appropriate rotation ages are estimated to be between 15 and 20 years of age. Most of the early failures were due to a combination of poor site selection, disease problems, inadequate silvicultural methods and growth rates which did not match expectations. These failures certainly contributed to a loss of private interest in SRWC at the time that the DOE Short Rotation Woody Crops Program and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Fast Growing Forest Program were just beginning.

Both the Canadian and U.S. research programs on short-rotation woody crops addressed the issues and problems identified by the early plantings. The Ontario program addressed the problems by working directly with an interested industry, Domtar, and learned by doing as they assisted Domtar in managing plantations on Domtar lands. Some of the early hybrid poplar plantings have been replaced with other species. Domtar has continued to be involved with hybrid poplars but they have leased higher quality land from farmers close to the mill and have improved their planting and management techniques (Adam Zulinski, Domtar, personal communication, May 1995). The U.S. program addressed the issues associated with SRWC by funding a variety of projects, primarily with academic institutions or the U.S. Forest Service, at several different locations around the country. The most successful of these projects gradually developed collaborative activities with industry as the value of their work became apparent. Most of the private sector plantings of SRWC which occurred between 1980 and 1994 have been closely linked with a university SRWC research program funded by DOE.

Recent interest by the private sector in SRWC has increased noticeably just within the past 2 years. Table 1 summarizes the status of active SRWC projects in the U.S. and Canada and the amount of land involved. Of particular interest is the column identifying new activity since my last assessment in 1990 (11 of the 12 new planting starts have actually occurred in 1994 or 1995). Most new plantings have been initiated by pulp and paper industries, however some of the projects under evaluation include feasibility studies being done for the purposes of producing biomass energy. Pulp and paper company interest is being stimulated, in part, by the current or anticipated reduction in hardwood supplies that is resulting from environmentally driven legislation and regulations in the U.S. Forest products industry interest is also being driven by the recognition of the worldwide competitive advantages being gained by the production of fast growing hardwoods in places like Brazil, Chili, South Africa, and Indonesia. If higher quality, lower cost fiber supplies can not be established in the U.S. then many jobs in the forest products industry will be lost or moved overseas.

Table 1. Summary of Short Rotation Woody Crop Demonstration and Commercialization Activity in the U.S. and Canada.
Table 1 formatted for browsers that do not support tables.

1. Plantings are either less than 500 acres or the market has not been specifically identified.

2. Total includes projects under evaluation but new category includes only projects planting crops since 1990.

3. Pacific commercial SRWC projects (with planting initiation years) include: James River Corp (1982), Scott Paper Ltd. (1984), Simpson Timber (1986), MacMillan Bloedel (1988), Boise Cascade (1991), Potlatch (1994), Georgia Pacific (1995), Ag West, (1995). Lousiana Pacific Corp. in CA with about 120 ha considered R&D Alberta Pacific, Fletcher Challenge, and Weyerhaeuser Corp. are evaluating or planning projects.

4. Southern U.S. commercial SRWC projects (with planting initiation years) include: James River Corp. (1982), Westvaco Corp. (1984), Scott Paper Co. (1988), Union Camp, (1995). The 23,000 acres of 15-20 year rotation Sweetgum managed by Union Camp and Westvaco are not included. Projects put in the R&D category include: Federal Paper Board (1987), municipal wastewater projects of Edenton & Woodland, N.C., Champion Paper Co. and an energy company in Florida. Entities evaluating or planning SRWC plantings include Natural Resource Holdings, John Sutherland, and a group in Kansas.

5. The only active commercial project in the central and eastern part of the U.S. or Canada is the one maintained by Domtar, a pulp and paper company in Ontario which was initiated in 1974. Other early projects totalling 400-800 ha have been abandoned or their status is unknown. Projects in the R&D phase are several including: State University of New York & University of Toronto trials of willow in New York and Ontario; US DOE co-sponsored clone sites trials in Minnesota & Wisconsin, US DOE co-sponsored scale-ups near Alexandria, Minnesota; Minnesota State & Minnesota Power scale-ups near Oakly, Minnesota; trials by Champion Paper , Georgia Pacific, & Energy Performance Systems. Blandin Paper Co and Potlatch are in the planning/evaluating phase in Minnesota. Year 2000 land area planted will likely be much larger than indicated if both pulp and paper and energy projects progress successfully.

6. A large tract of abandoned caneland on the big island of Hawaii has recently been purchased by Bishop Estates and bids have been solicited for a 10,000 ha planting of eucalyptus. More abandoned caneland could become available.

The probability is good that many of the SRWC projects being initiated by pulp and paper company will be successful. Company staff are contacting ORNL staff familiar with the SRWC research performed in each region, they are linking up with researchers in the regions, they are joining collaboratives and consortia established within the regions, and they are visiting and evaluating many of the successful commercial sites that have been established by early private sector adopters of the technology. The success of the projects will depend upon the ability of the company staff to quickly master the technical aspects of good site selection, proper site preparation and establishment techniques, and weed control techniques for SRWC. Considerably more information and expertise is available now than was available 15 to 20 years ago but success is not guaranteed, since firsthand learning is always required for adapting the techniques to the particular sites and climatic situations available.

Short-rotation woody crops have always been viewed as a multi-purpose crop. While some of the early commercial plantings were intended for energy end-use, such as the 20 ha planting in 1979 by the city of Hagerstown, Maryland and the 120 ha planting in 1981 by Reynolds Metal Company, most were planted by pulp and paper companies who were interested in new fast-growing sources of fiber. This trend has continued to today. Even where developers are interested in short-rotation woody crops as a dedicated biomass energy feedstock, there is a concern that the pulp and paper industry will tie-up the available supplies. Efforts are being made to resolve competition that might exist between energy and fiber end-users and to look for ways to build up the resource to meet the needs of both end-users. The acceleration in the development of the SRWC technology which is occurring by gaining the support and involvement of the pulp and paper industry, is anticipated to aid in the utilization of the technology for energy as well as for fiber.

One way of meeting both energy and fiber production goals is to encourage the pulp and paper industry to consider more seriously the co-production of energy from the wood resource. This could result, not only in total energy self sufficiency of the industry but also in an expansion of income generating products from the industry. Possibilities include not only excess electricity produced from the efficient burning of bark trash, sawdust and black liquor but also the production of liquid fuels or chemicals from the lignin components of the wood. The document "Agenda 2020: A Technology Vision and Research Agenda for America's Forest, Wood and Paper Industry" indicates the interest of the forest products industry in pursuing research of that nature (American Forest and Paper Association, 1994). The agreement being developed between the leaders of the forest products industry (as represented by the American Forest and Paper Association) and the Department of Energy is anticipated to lead to some innovative collaborative research that will address both energy and fiber supply issues.

Perhaps the most significant non-technical barrier to using biomass crops for energy is the lack of creativity and negativity in attitudes. "Too many people know what can't be done" is the way it was recently stated by a biomass energy proponent. With limited federal and private research budgets, ideas have to gain the acceptance and approval of many people before money can be obtained to develop a concept or build a prototype. Many "experts" (including myself) are often constrained by their training and experiences. Their opinions fail to credit what can be accomplished by "can do" people determined to make a new idea work. Based on these expert opinions, improvements tend to be slow and incremental based on modifications of currently accepted technologies (or technologies in which the government or industry are already heavily invested). This approach is understandable, it avoids major mistakes, it involves major industrial players in the work, and it may be inhibiting the emergence of new, innovative ideas and concepts that could make a difference now.

Non-technical barriers to using biomass crops for energy which could change with policy changes include factors such as, the high cost of land suitable for high yield production, the low cost of competing fossil fuel feedstocks, the lack of established energy markets, the lack of adequate financing mechanisms, and the lack of information and technical support for the farmers. Some of these barriers can only be resolved with policy changes. For instance, the USDA farm commodities price support programs have a major impact on the value of cropland. If those price supports were to be reduced or dropped, land values would drop. Fossil fuel prices are not likely to change in the foreseeable future unless environmental considerations add to the cost of using fossil fuels. The lack of established energy markets and financing mechanisms is a chicken and egg problem which federal programs are attempting to resolve by initiating cost-shared demonstrations of integrated biomass energy systems. The inadequacy of information and technical support to the farmer is an issue which must be addressed by DOE, USDA and state groups interested in facilitating biomass energy.

Technological barriers to the sustainable commercial production of switchgrass for energy are minimal but improvements to assure the availability of low-cost supplies are still needed. Experience with demand for the seed for CRP plantings showed that seed availability could be a problem during a period of rapid scale-up. Since only a few of the varieties currently available produce the yields needed for economically viable biomass energy systems, the need exists for additional breeding and selection programs for the Midwest and the southeast to produce optimally adapted varieties for those regions. Establishment of the crop in a way that leads to optimal production in the first and second year does vary with different parts of the country and requires some attention for risk reduction. Development, testing and demonstration of optimal harvesting, and handling strategies for switchgrass crops that considerably exceed the yields normally found with forage crops is also needed. Since handling and storage losses can make a considerable difference in the delivered yields, continued attention to the best ways to minimize such losses is necessary for assuring the economics of using the crop for energy.

The biggest technical barrier to the widespread use of hybrid poplars, willows or other fast growing hardwoods on a large scale for energy is that the sites and climates conducive to high-yield production of hybrid poplars and willows is rather limited for the currently available superior clones. Additional breeding efforts and field trials are needed throughout the country to determine which sources and clones are most suitable for each region. The recent addition of a third crop development center for poplars by the DOE program, will help, but it will require the involvement of the private sector to establish the many expensive field trials needed. Similar work needs to be done for at least one or two additional fast-growing hardwood species to assure that adaptable, pest resistant woody crops are available for a broad range of locations in the U.S. and Canada. Additional research could enhance the sustainability of the techniques used for SRWC production and/or assure the public that current approaches are environmentally beneficial in terms of biodiversity, chemical reduction, etc..

Biomass crop production technology is ready for application in an environmentally sustainable manner in many parts of the U.S. although significant opportunity exists for greater crop yield increases, and adaptability of the technology to a broader range of soil and climate conditions. One major question is how much land is available and what type of land is available. It was estimated by Graham (1994) that 8 to 16 million hectares of cropland could theoretically be converted to biomass production in the near future without displacing conventional crops in any significant way. This has been validated by more recent analysis done jointly by USDA, DOE and EPA (Ronigen et al,1995). However, the analysis being published by Turnure et al, (1995) also resulting from the same joint USDA, DOE and EPA analysis concludes that integrated biomass energy systems supplied solely with DFSS are not likely to be competitive with fossil energy systems until 2020. Even that is based on what might be considered an optimistic scenario for crop improvement and deployment, which assumes a well funded research program and considerable private sector cost sharing.

Stakeholder acceptance of the concept of growing perennial crops for energy is increasing. Emerging landowner/farm community acceptance is increasing as evidenced by the support of groups such as the American Corn Growers Association and the formation of the American Energy Crop Association in Peoria, Illinois. Likewise, utility acceptance appears to be slightly increasing as evidenced by the recent formation of the Utilities for Biomass Energy Commercialization Association, the continued participation of utilities in the Electric Power Research Institute's Biomass Working Group, the testing of biomass resources for co-firing by a number of utilities, and the participation of some utilities in biomass energy feasibility studies being conducted around the U.S. The bottomline for most utilities, however, is the relative cost of biomass energy compared to energy from fossil sources. Where utility interest in biomass exists, it is generally linked to a desire to provide a service to customers who have a biomass waste disposal problems or to a agricultural customer base which could benefit from local markets for biomass crops. Situations where independent power producers are considering using biomass energy systems also seem to provide an incentive for an established utility to consider the option. The acceptance of the general public and environmental groups is also beginning to increase as evidenced by the willingness of such groups to participate in national and regional roundtable discussion groups which particularly focus on the environmental issues surrounding the potential large-scale deployment of biomass crops.

As discussed in the previous section, policy factors are a significant barrier limiting biomass crops from providing a significant energy resource in the near term. Consideration of policy changes are occurring. The outcome of the 1995 farm bill will be a critical factor in determining the near term interest of the agricultural community in biomass crops. The U. S. Department of Agriculture has included biomass crops as an option in performing it's analysis to aid in the establishment of new farm policies. Numerous constituency groups are preparing analysis and statements on the desirability of policy changes which would encourage the establishment of biomass crops, this includes the American Forest and Paper Association which sees the benefits of additional fiber supplies being developed on agricultural land. Analysts have suggested that farm policy does not need to be radically changed but that relatively minor changes in existing programs could have a significant impact. One example is the continuation of the Conservation Reserve Program at some level with a modification to allow establishment and harvesting of crops for energy as long as the soil conservation objectives of the program continue to be met.

The successful demonstration of new biomass conversion technologies in the near future will be a critical factor in attracting investor interest and establishing markets for DFSS. Thus the program recently initiated by DOE, as part of the Climate Change Action Plan, to initiate cost-shared demonstrations of integrated biomass energy systems could have a major impact on how soon new biomass energy technology is implemented. The type of conversion technologies which are demonstrated will also have an impact on how quickly biomass crops become part of the biomass supply picture. Considerable risk is perceived to be involved in linking new crop production technologies and supply systems to new conversion technologies. Thus it will be difficult to gain acceptance or market penetration of biomass energy systems largely dependent on DFSS unless they are first demonstrated in systems where the risk is shared by the government, and the private sector. It is anticipated that the research and demonstrations which occur over the next 5 years will be critical to determining whether biomass crops become a significant contributor to sustainable energy supplies within 15-20 years or whether it will require 25-50 years. This will be a important time period for federal programs supporting biomass energy development to remain strong in their support.

American Forest and Paper Association. 1994. Agenda 2020: A Technology Vision and Research Agenda for America's Forest, Wood and Paper Industry. American Forest and Paper Association. Washington, D.C.

Arnold, R. B. 1995. Investment in Fast-Growing Trees Offers Future Wood Procurement Advantages. Pulp and Paper, April 1995:135-137.

Graham, R. L. 1994. An Analysis of the Potential Land Base for Energy Crops in the Conterminous United States. Biomass and Bioenergy 6(3):175-189.

Ronigen, V. O., H. Shapouri, R. L. Graham, M. E. Walsh, E. Lichtenberg. 1995. The Economics of Biomass Production in the United States. IN Proceedings: Second Biomass Conference of the Americas.

Turnure, J. T., Winnett, S. M., Shackleton, R. G., and Hohenstein, W. G. 1995. Biomass Electricity: Long-run Economic Prospects and Climate Policy Implications. In Proceedings: Second Biomass Conference of the Americas.

U.S. Department of Energy. 1994. Solicitation for Financial Assistance Applications: Biomass Power for Rural Development. U.S. Department of Energy, Golden Field Office. Golden, CO 80401.

Wright, L. L. 1990. Commercialization of Short-Rotation Intensive Culture Tree Production in North America. In Klass, D. L. (ed) Energy from Biomass and Wastes XII. Institute of Gas Technology, Illinois, U.S.A.

Research sponsored by the Biofuels Systems Division of the U.S. Department of Energy under contract DE-AC05-84OR21400 with Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc.