Land for Largest Field of Swithgrass for Bioenergy Acquired

Oklahoma has secured 1,100 acres of land for the world's largest stand of switchgrass devoted to
cellulosic ethanol production. Planting will take place within the next 45 days.

Switchgrass is a perennial grass that is naturally drought resistant and grows on marginal lands.The Oklahoma Bioenergy Center (OBC), demonstration fields will provide academia and industry a unique "living laboratory" to understand the production and long-term impact of bioenergy crops, as well as experiment with new production techniques and critical harvest, collection and transport methods.

The critical piece of this effort is 1,000 acres of switchgrass which will be planted near Guymon, Okla. in the state's panhandle. This switchgrass field will be the first of its size anywhere in the world focused on biomass production. Additional acreage of sorghum and switchgrass will be planted near Chickasha and Maysville in central Oklahoma.

A cellulosic biorefinery currently being constructed by Abengoa Boenergy in Hugoton, Kan., will be less than 35 miles from Guymon, and the switchgrass fields in the panhandle will provide material to this biorefinery. The Abengoa Bioenergy facility is expected to be operational in 2010.

This will be a major step in the production of bioenergy from switchgrass.  While it may seem to be a rather trivial matter, until it is demonstrated that the switchgrass can be successfully harvested at an economic cost, the use of switchgrass for this purpose is in question. Plantings for other uses of switchgrass are unlikely to provide this information as they are generally not harvested and the yield is not of such concern. Some small demonstrations have been made, but they are not necessarily applicable to larger stands.

The harvesting and any other questions about growing the switchgrass could delay the use of switchgrass, 1) by eliminating the need for a commercial grower to go through this step 2) to show financial backers of switchgrass bioenergy facilities that this step is not a problem 3) to shorten the time before switchgrass is accepted as a viable feedstock for bioenergy and 4) To determine the optimum planting density to obtain the best yield per acre as numbers for this vary greatly.   

Comments

[Will]

Ethanol Producers desperatly need to start cranking this stuff out in massive quanities if they want to continue to scale production past 15 billion gallons (The current administrations cap on corn based ethanol). The United States already has 13.6 billion gallon capacity operational or under constructions and only 22 million gallons of that come from cellulosic ethanol. It's a good sign to see cellulosic ethanol finally emerging, but this needs to happen alot faster if this country wants to remain serious about biofuel production.

[me2]

1100 acres is almost nothing ! Its less than 1 mile x 2 miles of land. My dad used to farm twice that much land all by himself. And its no big deal to plant switchgrass. a) Its commonly grown and b) you can always cut it and bale it and feed it to cattle. I don't know what the big deal is about. Cellulosic ethanol would be better than corn ethanol, but its still will need a ton of land and it will be energy wasteful. We need to look at conservation and electric cars !

[Samantha]

If you'd like to learn more about the potential for advanced feedstocks, such as switchgrass, algae, and others, you should check out the Renewable Energy Finance Forum-Wall Street, held June 18-19 in New York City.

REFF brings together financiers and renewable energy project developers, like Abengoa, to network and share ideas about the future of the industry. One of the official event sessions will feature Bill Holmberg, the Chairman of the Biomass Coordinating Council, leading a discussion about biofuels--including switchgrass.

For more information, visit www.REFFWallStreet.com.

[Kit P]

And what will they learn (again)?

“will be less than 35 miles”

This is too far to haul biomass to produce energy. Transportation is the largest environmental impact of biomass. It is also a safety consideration.

Hauling feed is a different story. Agriculture is not held to the same safety and environmental standards as the energy industry. Considering past practices agriculture would go out of business if it had to meet the same standards as the rest of industry. Since starvation would result, most everyone looked the other ways.

Since agriculture is getting into energy business, this will change. Some are concerned about a trunk carrying spent nuclear fuel. I am concerned about trucks carrying anhydrous ammonia. Energy facilities smut have an EIS per NEPA. If the EIS shows more trucks carrying anhydrous ammonia down the road with school buses carrying my children, then they will have to show how it is significantly better than the alternatives.

[wray]

Thanks for the post, tiny nit; your headline is missing a "c" in "switchgrass"

[me2]

Anhydrous Ammonia is a relatively safe chemical.

Its slightly combustible under very specific conditions. Mostly it dries out your eyes if you get a whiff of it.

I grew up on the farm and applied a lot of NH4. Its no big deal. If an NH4 truck hit a school bus and the tank burst open, children could be affected. But it is a lot safer than a fuel truck carrying gasoline, which would likely kill everyone.

So before you say that NH4 trucks should be kept off the road, we should take gasoline tankers off the road. Are you ready to quit driving ?

[Kit P]

It would appear that me2 is missing the point. Energy facilities must meet higher standards than his daddy's farm. Did me2 help with the NEPA EIS? Did his daddy train him to OSHA 1910 regulations? Has me2 read the MSDS for anhydrous ammonia?

“Anhydrous Ammonia is a relatively safe chemical.”

No actually, anhydrous ammonia is a very hazardous chemical unless me2 does not consider immediate death a hazard to consider. Judging from the number of deaths and significant injuries related to anhydrous ammonia the risk is not easy to mitigate.

A properly written EIS would describe the feedstock sources for the the ethanol plant and the safety practices that would be followed.

Just for the record, many of the farms I have visited meet the highest standards for safety and respect for the environment. Producing biofuels is an excellent alternative to importing energy.

[me2]

"It would appear that me2 is missing the point. Energy facilities must meet higher standards than his daddy's farm." No, I didn't miss the point. There is nothing wrong with the current farm and chemical safety standards ? "Did me2 help with the NEPA EIS?" No. Did his daddy train him to OSHA 1910 regulations? Has me2 read the MSDS for anhydrous ammonia?" Yes and Yes. As a matter of fact, the local fire department was trained especially for handling NH4 spills and we did simulations that involved leaks. Respirators and gloves were worn. Eye wash stations are on the equipment, etc. Fully trained ! Hazardous material placards present and material safety data sheets in the tractor with an emergency phone number. Ready, prepared, informed and trained ! “Anhydrous Ammonia is a relatively safe chemical.” No actually, anhydrous ammonia is a very hazardous chemical unless me2 does not consider immediate death a hazard to consider. If NH4 is dangerous then so is gasoline, diesel fuel, household ammonia, bleach, battery acid, hydrogen, propane, natural gas, oven cleaner, etc. Stop making a boogie man out of something that when used properly is perfectly safe ! Are you worried about your propane tank on your BBQ blowing up and killing you ? Well apparently you should be because propane tanks are far, far more lethal than NH4 is. "Judging from the number of deaths and significant injuries related to anhydrous ammonia the risk is not easy to mitigate." What the heck are you talking about ? The following google search is not turning up many deaths. http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=%22Anhydrous+ammonia%22+death&btnG=Google+Search&meta= "A properly written EIS would describe the feedstock sources for the the ethanol plant and the safety practices that would be followed. Just for the record, many of the farms I have visited meet the highest standards for safety and respect for the environment." Don't start telling us that we should outlaw NH4 as a fertilizer source for ethanol plants ! I have a degree in agriculture ! Plants need nitrogen and NH4 is a heck of a lot better than other forms on N. "Producing biofuels is an excellent alternative to importing energy." Biofuels are terrible in that they have a poor overall energy balance. To say nothing about the fact that we are burning food for energy and people are starving around the world. Even if it is ethanol from cellulose, its still using agricultural land for producing fuel.

[Kit P]

I am glad me2 is somewhat trained to handle hazardous material. It is nice that has me2 has an ag degree. Now if we can get me3 to couple his brain and education to think for himself rather than blindly accept what English major write and parrot it back. In other words, me2 it sounds like you have some education and experience that is more interesting and informative than the NYT agenda driven fiction posing as journalism.

The first mistake me2 makes is playing the 'what about this what about that game'. Yes, each hazard must be addressed. Please note me2 that you are playing the 'boogie man' game not me. If you are going to rant try to at least read what I wrote. There is a difference between evaluating the best choices and 'outlaw NH4'. I will come back to anhydrous ammonia for growing biomass.

“not turning up many deaths”

The second mistake me2 makes is having low standards. For the record me2, the criteria where I work is zero. The last facility I worked on a hazard analysis (integrated safety analysis to be exact), the largest risk in terms of total deaths (on and offsite) was anhydrous ammonia.

“Biofuels are terrible in that they have a poor overall energy balance.”

Really compared to what? Certainly not compared to EVs that he touts. The second mistake me2 makes is not using a systematic approach for evaluating energy production. How many LCA has me2 read? This a trap many with college degrees make. What I know about local ag practices does not come from the NYT but talking to farmers and agronomists.

This is a very complicated issue. The goal should be to safely reduce dependence on foreign energy sources without creating a larger environmental impact. The basis for discussing miles driven and
anhydrous ammonia is that they are both important factors for safety, energy use, and environment impact.

“its still using agricultural land for producing fuel”

Really, where did me2 get his ag degree, the free republic of Davis?

The makes mistake me2 makes is not 'thinking out of the box'. Here is the deal, and me2 should know this if his head was not so far up you know where. The US has a huge amounts of semi-arid land like the panhandle of Oklahoma. What happens when you use too much anhydrous ammonia to increase productivity? Anhydrous ammonia is very toxic to bacteria. When you kill the bacteria holding the soil together, the first strong wind creates a dust bowl.

Turning marginal land into productive land using the applicable ag techniques is a win-win-win situation that can be replicated 1000 of times. Reducing natural environmental impact (wind erosion), creating local jobs, reducing energy imports. There could be a substantial ghg reduction but that is very location specific.

[Engineer-Poet]

me2:

• NH3 is ammonia.  NH4+ is the ammonium ion.
• Learn to use the

  and

  HTML tags, as well as standard paragraph structure.

[Engineer-Poet]

Crap, the lousy software converted the escapes without re-escaping them.  That was the

and

tags.

[Engineer-Poet]

It DID IT AGAIN.  This appears to require DOUBLE escapes:

and

tags.

[Engineer-Poet]

I don't believe this.

Just use "blockquote" and "/blockquote" inside pairs of "<" and ">" characters.

[me2]

"Anhydrous ammonia is very toxic to bacteria. When you kill the bacteria holding the soil together, the first strong wind creates a dust bowl."

Have you EVER farmed ? Do you know anything about farming ?

[Bob Wallace]

Switchgrass is a perennial grass. When harvested the tops are cut off, the root structure remains. That makes a "dust bowl" situation rather unlikely.

Does the idea of making liquid fuels from plants make sense? Research will tell.

Test plots like this will tell us more about the real world problems that might or might not exist.

Transportation to a processing plant might be a major problem. Long hauls of low energy mass would be a deal killer. But there might be a way to create small processing plants that could sit in the middle of switchgrass farming areas.

And growing it in Oklahoma? OK is a pretty windy place. Wind -> electricity -> ammonia might also be a part of the puzzle. One might be able to create a nitrogen source quite close to where it was to be applied.

[Bob Wallace]

""Producing ethanol from corn requires almost as much energy to produce as it yields," he explains, "while ethanol from switchgrass can produce about five times more energy than you put in. When you factor in the energy required to make tractors, transport farm equipment, plant and harvest, and so on, the net energy output of switchgrass is about 20 times better than corn's." Switchgrass also does a far better job of protecting soil, virtually eliminating erosion. And it removes considerably more CO2 from the air, packing it away in soils and roots."

"Bransby's (a switchgrass farmer in Alabama) 6-year average, 11.5 tons a year, translates into about 11,500 gallons of ethanol per acre. An added bonus is the electricity that can be produced from the leftover portions of the crop that won't convert to ethanol."

Oak Ridge National Lab report

http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/switgrs.html

[Kit P]

“OK is a pretty windy place. Wind -> electricity -> ammonia might also be a part of the puzzle.”

To be sustainable, you have to play the cards you are dealt.

[me2]

a) plants don't need ammonia. They need nitrogen. The hydrogen ion is just a convenient way to carry nitrogen, which is normally a gas. b) If everyone is all worried about nitrogen, put the switchgrass into a rotation with a legume (peas, alfalfa). If you inoculate those plants, they fix nitrogen from the air into the soil. The comment about NH3 being dangerous really go my goat. Its really obvious that the person who made this comment doesn't know anything about NH3 and/or farming. And once I provided information he came back with "one death is too many". But yet 1) I bet this person walks across the street everyday and uses a propane BBQ from time to time and 2) I bet this person drives a car with gasoline and would like to use ethanol. You can't have it all ! If you want cheap bread on your table or ethanol, we have to use fertilizer. And NH3 is a very safe effective way to fertilize. For someone with zero background in agriculture to come on here and criticize that just burns me up ! It seems that everyone who can read on the Internet and has an opinion has become an expert in all things alternative energy. FWIW, I work with a company involved with alternative energy. That doesn't make me an expert, I'm just disclosing so people know where I am speaking from. Have a great day.

[me2]

For the record, I put paragraph breaks and such in the above post but they don't show. I have no idea why. My paragraph breaks used to show up just fine.

[Bob Wallace]

me2 -

You got sucked into an exchange with Kit P.

Best to just ignore him.

[Kit P]

Thanks, Bob for appointing yourself to the Interned COPs but for the benefit other readers I will share this:

“Farmers will often transport anhydrous ammonia from fertilizer plants in trailer tanks hooked to pickup trucks or tractors. The material is not dangerous when handled properly, but if not handled carefully it can be extremely dangerous.”

http://www.firehouse.com/training/hazmat/studies/2002/03_ammonia.html

If me2 is any indication, the diver of the pickup does not understand the difference between Anhydrous Ammonia and a weak solution of Ammonia hydroxide. So give the farmers a break when you see them hauling white trailers and stay upwind.

If that is not scary enough, me2 wrote

“plants don't need ammonia. They need nitrogen.”

Where did you go to ag school? This must be the little black box of ag theory. Stick some chemicals in the ground and see what happens.

It would be nice if an ag degreed person understood more about the environment and how plants up take nutrients.

[me2]

You got sucked into an exchange with Kit P.
Best to just ignore him.
===============================================

Thanks for the advice. I'm relatively new here. I guess I got sucked in.

Great site, btw !

[Bob Wallace]

Blue Fire, a ethanol manufacturer is in the process of building plants next to landfills where they plan on converting biomass (waste wood, non-recyclable paper, yard waste) into fuel. (They have built and tested three pilot project plants.)

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/bluefire-to-break-ground-879.html

They are designing plants which are "modular" and can be efficiently built where the raw material sources are. These plants are designed to handle about 700 tons of material a day.

Five year yield averages for switchgrass run 11.5 tons per acre. Let's use 10 for easier math and to build some conservation into the numbers from the get-go.

10 tons per acre yield.
700 tons per day to feed the plant.
70 acres per day.
25,500 acres per year (365 days operation).
Approximately 40 square miles.

A rough maximum haul of 7 miles for a well designed switchgrass to ethanol plantation with the conversion plant located right in the middle of the fields.

Obviously the average haul would be half that. At potentially 11,000 gallons of ethanol per acre we could fuel the trucks and still have some left over to sell.

http://bioenergy.ornl.gov/papers/misc/switgrs.html

[Engineer-Poet]

If you consider the area as a circle of 40 mi² area centered on the plant, the maximum distance would be only 3.6 miles as the crow flies.

Keeping a plant busy 24/7/365 requires a source of feedstock which is available year-round and doesn't change characteristics enough to require different processing systems.  Does switchgrass meet that definition?  It grows seasonally, and its mature stems are very different from the growing shoots (at least for ruminant feed).  Harvesting it in deep winter snow could be a problem, so it would have to be brought in and baled after the growing season.  The naïve calculations are probably a bit optimistic.

There's also the conflicting need for food.  Rather than growing switchgrass as an energy crop on well-watered land, maize is probably the optimal crop; it can produce ~4 tons/acre of grain plus ~2 tons/acre of available stover.  Whatever is fed to livestock yields manure which can be digested for methane, giving a three-fer.

[Bob Wallace]

I went with sloppy-larger numbers to avoid the nit-picker(s) who attempt(s) to find one small problem and then declare an idea invalid. ;o)

Switchgrass is a pretty sturdy plant and is cut for hay. As someone who has been intimate with hay, if you keep it dry it lasts a long time. I would assume that it would be possible to cut, bale and cover in season in order to carry over to the next.

Additionally, if we're talking about run down cotton land in the Deep South, we're probably talking multiple crops per year and no snow worries. And we wouldn't be taking land out of food production, but using poor quality land that would require major inputs to grow a food crop.

Here's a couple of cuts from the linked article....
...

In the hard, shallow soil of southern Alabama, Dave Bransby is turning cotton fields into swatches of grassland. Some Alabama farmers joke that there's no soil in Alabama to farm—two centuries of King Cotton and steady erosion haven't left much behind.

...

"Producing ethanol from corn requires almost as much energy to produce as it yields," he explains, "while ethanol from switchgrass can produce about five times more energy than you put in. When you factor in the energy required to make tractors, transport farm equipment, plant and harvest, and so on, the net energy output of switchgrass is about 20 times better than corn's."

An encouraging thing about swtichgrass is that it seems to give something back to the land as opposed to corn which is a heavy feeder and hard on land.