Modelling the value of a rural biorefinery - Part II: Analysis and implications

Agricultural Systems

Volumn 76, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 61-76

  Annetts, J E ^a   Audsley, E ^a  

^a SILSOE RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Biorefinery; Fractionation; Linear programming; Modelling

Indexed keywords

MODELING; PROFITABILITY; REFINING INDUSTRY; RURAL AREA;

UNITED KINGDOM;

TRITICUM AESTIVUM;

EID: 0037375770     PISSN: 0308521X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0308-521X(02)00039-2     Document Type: Article

References (5)

1. Audsley, E., 1987. The Effects of Field Burning Restrictions, Straw Incorporation and Alternative Uses as Fuel, Fibre or Feed on the Amount of Field Burning and the Supply and Demand for Straw and the Economic Consequences on the Farm of Baling, Incorporating or Briquetting (AFRC IER Report No. 52). July.
2. Audsley, E., Sells, J.E. Modelling the value of a rural biorefinery. Part I: the model decription. Agricultural Systems (in press).
3. Bioraf Denmark Foundation, 1995. The Whole Crop Biorefinery Project (Main Report). October.
4. Murphy, M.C., 1992. Report on Farming in the Eastern Counties of England 1991/92. University of Cambridge.
5. Sells, J.E., 2000. The Use of a Whole Farm Model to Calculate the Impact on a Farming Location of Producing for a Central Biorefinery (Silsoe Research Institute Internal Report).