Estimating national costs, benefits, and potential for cellulosic ethanol production from forest thinnings

Biomass and Bioenergy

Volumn 35, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 2133-2142

  Kocoloski, Matthew ^a   Michael Griffin, W ^a,b   Scott Matthews, H ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Biofuels; Cellulosic ethanol; Forest thinning

Indexed keywords

BIOMASS REMOVAL; ESTIMATE COST; FOREST LAND; FOREST THINNING; FOREST THINNINGS; FUEL REDUCTION; GASOLINE PRICES; IN-SITU; PRESCRIBED FIRES; PUBLIC AGENCIES; THINNING TREATMENT; THINNINGS; USDA FOREST SERVICE; WILDFIRE SEVERITY;

BIOMASS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COSTS; ETHANOL; FEEDSTOCKS; FIRES;

CELLULOSIC ETHANOL;

BIOENERGY; BIOFUEL; BIOMASS; CELLULOSE; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ETHANOL; FINANCIAL SERVICES; FOREST MANAGEMENT; PRESCRIBED BURNING; PUBLIC SERVICE; THINNING; WILDFIRE;

EID: 79953287540     PISSN: 09619534     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.02.010     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Fire information - wildland fire statistics. National Interagency Fire Center. Available at: [accessed 23.08.09]. http://www.nifc.gov/fire_info/fires_acres.htm.
2. Perlack R.D. Biomass as feedstock for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry: the technical feasibility of a billion-ton annual supply 2005, Report No.: ORNL/TM-2005/66; TRN: US200617%%291.
3. Mason C.L., Lippke B.R., Zobrist K.W., Bloxton T.D., Ceder K.R., Comnick J.M., et al. Investments in fuel removals to avoid forest fires result in substantial benefits. J Forest 2006, 104(1):27.
4. Fiscal year 2008 President's budget: overview February 5, 2007, United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Available at:. http://www.fs.fed.us/publications/budget-2008/fy2008-forest-service-budget-overview.pdf.
5. Rummer B., Prestemon J., May D., Miles P., Vissage J., McRoberts R., et al. A strategic assessment of forest biomass and fuel reduction treatments in western states 2003, US Dept of Agriculture, Forest Service, Research and Development, [Washington, DC], 2003(iii):p. 18.
6. Graham R.T., Harvey A.E., Jain T.B., Tonn J.R. The effects of thinning and similar stand treatments on fire behavior in western forests 1999, Gen Tech Rep PNW-GTR-463, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, OR, p. 27.
7. Fiscal year 2009 President's budget: budget justification February 5, 2008, United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Available at:. http://www.fs.fed.us/publications/budget-2008/fy2008-forest-service-budget-justification.pdf.
8. LeVan-Green S.L., Livingston J. Exploring the uses for small-diameter trees. Forest Prod J 9 Sept. 2001, 51:10-21.
9. Rummer B. Assessing the cost of fuel reduction treatments: a critical review. Forest Pol Econ 2008, 10(6):355-362.
10. Polagye B.L., Hodgson K.T., Malte P.C. An economic analysis of bio-energy options using thinnings from overstocked forests. Biomass Bioenergy 2007, 31(2-3):105-125.
11. Eriksson L.N., Gustavsson L. Biofuels from stumps and small roundwood - costs and CO2 benefits. Biomass Bioenergy 2008, 32(10):897-902.
12. Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. Library of Congress. Washington, DC.
13. Perlack, Robert. Personal communication.
14. Mahmudi H., Flynn P. Rail vs truck transport of biomass. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2006, 129(1):88-103.
15. Wakeley H.L., Hendrickson C.T., Griffin W.M., Matthews H.S. Economic and environmental transportation effects of large-scale ethanol production and distribution in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 2009, 43(7):2228-2233.
16. Goldemberg J. Ethanol for a sustainable energy future. Science February 9, 2007, 315(5813):808-810.
17. Huang H.-J., Ramaswamy S., Al-Dajani W., Tschirner U., Cairncross R.A. Effect of biomass species and plant size on cellulosic ethanol: a comparative process and economic analysis. Biomass Bioenergy 2009, 33(2):234-246.
18. Hamelinck C.N., Hooijdonk G.V., Faaij A.P.C. Ethanol from lignocellulosic biomass: techno-economic performance in short-, middle- and long-term. Biomass Bioenergy 2005, 28(4):384-410.
19. Aden A., Ruth M., Ibsen K., Jechura J., Neeves K., Sheehan J., et al. Lignocellulosic biomass to ethanol process design and economics utilizing co-current dilute acid prehydrolysis and enzymatic hydrolysis for corn stover 2002, United States, Report No.: NREL/TP-510-32438; TRN: US200401%%472.
20. Phillips S., Aden A., Jechura J., Dayton D., Eggeman T. Thermochemical ethanol via indirect gasification and mixed alcohol synthesis of lignocellulosic biomass 2007, Report No.: NREL/TP-510-41168; TRN: US200719%%596.
21. Han J., Kamber M. Data mining concepts and techniques 2005, Morgan Kaufman. 2nd ed.
22. Gallagher P.W., Brubaker H., Shapouri H. Plant size: capital cost relationships in the dry mill ethanol industry. Biomass Bioenerg 2005, 28(6):565-571.
23. Nguyen M.H., Prince R.G.H. A simple rule for bioenergy conversion plant size optimisation: bioethanol from sugar cane and sweet sorghum. Biomass Bioenergy 1996, 10(5-6):361-365.
24. Biorefinery locations. Renewable Fuels Association. [accessed 31.07.09]. http://www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/locations/.
25. Morrow W.R., Griffin W.M., Matthews H.S. Modeling switchgrass derived cellulosic ethanol distribution in the United States. Environ Sci Technol 2006, 40(9):2877-2886.
26. Ethanol transportation backgrounder: expansion of U.S. corn-based ethanol from the agricultural transportation perspective September 2007, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Marketing Service, Transportation and Marketing Programs Transportation Services Branch.
27. MTBS Data Access. Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity. Available at: [accessed 23.08.09]. http://www.mtbs.gov/dataaccess/dataaccess.html.
28. Smith W.B., Miles P., Vissage J., Pugh S.A. Forest resources of the United States, 2002 2004, General Technical Report NC-241, US Dept of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St Paul, MN.
29. Cooper J., Dohlman E., Goss Eng A., Heisey P., Lewandrowski J., Malcolm S., et al. Increasing feedstock production for biofuels: economic drivers, environmental implications, and the role of research 2008, Biomass Resource Development Board, HD9502.5.B543.
30. Morrow W.R., Griffin W.M., Matthews H.S. State-level infrastructure and economic effects of switchgrass cofiring with coal in existing power plants for carbon mitigation. Environ Sci Technol 2007, 41(19):6657-6662.
31. Morrow W.R., Griffin W.M., Matthews H.S. National-level infrastructure and economic effects of switchgrass cofiring with coal in existing power plants for carbon mitigation. Environ Sci Technol 2008, 42(10):3501-3507.
32. Tillman D.A. Biomass cofiring: the technology, the experience, the combustion consequences. Biomass Bioenerg 2000, 19(6):365-384.
33. Hughes E. Biomass cofiring: economics, policy and opportunities. Biomass Bioenergy 2000, 19(6):457-465.
34. Mann M., Spath P. A life cycle assessment of biomass cofiring in a coal-fired power plant. Clean Prod Processes 2001, 3(2):81-91.
35. Craig K.R., Mann M.K. Cost and performance analysis of biomass-based integrated gasification combined-cycle (BIGCC) power systems 1996, Report No.: NREL/TP-;430-21657.
36. Haq Z. Biomass for electricity generation July 2002, Energy Information Administration, Available at:. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biomass/.
37. Mann M.K., Spath P.L. Life cycle assessment of a biomass gasification combined-cycle power system 1997, Report No.: NREL/TP-;430-23076.
38. Rhodes J.S., Keith D.W. Engineering economic analysis of biomass IGCC with carbon capture and storage. Biomass Bioenergy 2005, 29(6):440-450.
39. Biomass feedstock composition and property database. U.S. Department of Energy. Available at: [accessed 24.08.09]. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/feedstock_databases.html.
40. Morrow WR. U.S biomass energy: an assessment of costs and infrastructure for alternative uses of biomass energy crops as an energy feedstock. Carnegie Mellon University Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Doctoral Thesis. May, 2006.
41. Campbell J.E., Lobell D.B., Field C.B. Greater transportation energy and GHG offsets from bioelectricity than ethanol. Science May 7, 2009, 2009:1168885.
42. eGRID. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Available at: [accessed 03.05.09]. http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/egrid/index.html.