Download (4Mb) - USQ ePrints - University of Southern Queensland

More documents

Recommendations

Info

• Transporter - Sugarcane Infield – Wheel • Transporter - Sugarcane Infield – Tracked • Transporter - Sugarcane Infield – Excess Length For each category of infield sugarcane transport equipment there are three options of road access allowable under conditional registration. These include; • Limited access registration — vehicles are predominantly restricted to worksites and designated areas. • Zone access registration — vehicles are allowed to travel on road for distances of 20 kilometres (km), 40 km, or 80 km depending on their areas of operation in Queensland. • Unrestricted access registration — appropriate vehicles will be allowed unlimited access, but may still have conditions that apply to the time of operation. Mallee System As transport regulations vary from state to state, licensing of infield transport that travel on public roads may be required. This will involve the mallee industry working with the WA Department of Transport and other transport regulators in each of the states to define appropriate guidelines for conditional registration. In the regions where mallees are grown, oversize farm machinery is commonly driven on public roads, such as contract grain harvesters that are overwidth, and towing long combs, that travel the northsouth extent of the Queensland to Victoria grain belt. These also tend to be the regions where vehicles are permitted the greatest overall length. This may be in contrast with the sugar industry which is located along the eastern seaboard often in close proximity to urban and semi-rural lifestyle properties. However there will be need to consult with the various transport regulators, especially with regard to technical issues, for example, the use of high speed tractors towing large capacity trailers in road train configurations. 3.2.5 Discussion In sugarcane systems the cost of infield transport varies up to $9 per tonne according to distance and speed when these factors are analysed individually. Haulout fuel use is about 50% of harvester fuel usage. Modelled estimates for mallee indicate that infield transport will cost about 75% of the per-tonne cost of harvesting, and haulouts will use about 60% of the fuel used by the harvester. These proportions reflect the assumptions that the two haulouts combined are almost as capital intensive as the harvester and there are two haulout operators for every harvester operator. Harvesting will also be particularly energy intensive (due to the chipper) and a haulout does not need to operate under full load while returning empty to the harvester or waiting while the other haulout is being loaded. Monitoring of all fuel use should be considered when a commercial system is developed. The mallee industry should consult with the transport regulators in all states to define appropriate guidelines for conditional registration if required. 93
3.3 Road Transport 3.3.1 Configuration Sugar System The most common type of road transport is the multi-lift semi-trailer carrying one single multi-lift bin at a time. Figure 3.13 illustrates the multi-lift bin. With this configuration the semi-trailer unloads the multi-lift bin onto a level surface (usually a dedicated pad). The infield haulouts load straight into the multi-lift bin as shown in Figure 3.1. This system is in use in all NSW mill areas and predominant in Bundaberg and in North Queensland on the Atherton Tablelands. The cane is unloaded from the bin whilst the bin is on the multi-lift trailer. To unload the cane from the bin, the multi-lift trailer is hydraulically raised from the front and the rear door of the bin pivots from the top of the bin and is manually opened. The cane exits under gravity from the rear of the bin. Figure 3.13 Multi-lift semi-trailer bin In other areas with road transport (e.g. Maryborough, Mossman) there are semi-trailer combinations of multi-lift bins and direct loading of multiple roll on/roll off railway bins or B-Double trailers capable of carrying three, 12 tonne transfer bins. NSWSMC when evaluating materials handling options for whole-of-crop harvesting investigated several alternate systems including the German, Fliegl Gigant push-off trailer (see Figure 3.14). Whilst of interest, such units require a complete change in the materials handling equipment as they were not compatible with the existing multi-lift system. High capital cost and potentially greater unloading times were additional reasons why NSWSMC did not pursue these types of systems. NSWSMC did not consider side tipping trailers as this did not suit existing unloading configurations at the mill. 94
Page 1 and 2:
Sustainable Biomass Supply Chain fo
Page 3 and 4:
Foreword This report provides an as
Page 5 and 6:
include business development (new p
Page 7 and 8:
Acknowledgments The authors would l
Page 9 and 10:
4.1 Product Options and Supply Chai
Page 11 and 12:
Table 4.2 Assessment of current val
Page 13 and 14:
Figure 3.4 Tracked rigid self-prope
Page 15 and 16:
Executive Summary What the report i
Page 17 and 18:
• Biomass production potential of
Page 19 and 20:
• As the Industry expands, the mo
Page 21 and 22:
Harvesting, transport and storage s
Page 23 and 24:
Biomass processing, supply chain pl
Page 25 and 26:
Key barriers to biomass industries
Page 27 and 28:
Crop-Biomass Production Production
Page 29 and 30:
Figure 1.1 The cropping and pasture
Page 31 and 32:
Table 1.1 Mallee species used for p
Page 33 and 34:
1.1.4 Growth Cycle Mallee System Ma
Page 35 and 36:
northern New South Wales (where it
Page 37 and 38:
Almost 80% of the industry now cuts
Page 39 and 40:
Bark has relatively high ash but as
Page 41 and 42:
Carbon sinks Planting of mallees to
Page 43 and 44:
Table 1.5(a) State Land area devote
Page 45 and 46:
out the fluctuations in farm income
Page 47 and 48:
Mallee system Most of the mallee bi
Page 49 and 50:
inconclusive result may have been d
Page 51 and 52:
For a sustainable woody crop indust
Page 53 and 54:
changed significantly since they we
Page 55 and 56:
Figure 2.2 Biosystems Engineering p
Page 57 and 58:
Whole-of-crop harvesting represents
Page 59 and 60:
During the last decade the harvesti
Page 61 and 62:
single row, as this would improve t
Page 63 and 64:
2.2.2.2 Weight Sugar System The Aus
Page 65 and 66: Table 2.1 Harvester Comparison Tabl
Page 67 and 68: The quality of cut may be less impo
Page 69 and 70: ate than a 170 tonne/ha crop of sta
Page 71 and 72: Dry Leaf 6.1 - 3.5 17.0 58.9 53.2 T
Page 73 and 74: Bulk density will be a key consider
Page 75 and 76: Table 2.4 EM levels in cane supply
Page 77 and 78: L/T L/T 60 0.97 0.71 80 0.92 0.66 1
Page 79 and 80: Total 7.5-26 16.5 Mallee System The
Page 81 and 82: • waiting for mill delivery of em
Page 83 and 84: perhaps at 10 - 20 km intervals. Th
Page 85 and 86: transport arrangements, harvest gro
Page 87 and 88: contractors and growers, and the fa
Page 89 and 90: experience of the sugar industry wi
Page 91 and 92: Table 2.11 Alternative harvest paym
Page 93 and 94: onto the harvester. BR+F still send
Page 95 and 96: Repairs and maintenance 2.10 Capita
Page 97 and 98: Figure 2.14 and Table 2.14 describe
Page 99 and 100: Sichter et al. (2005)), harvest and
Page 101 and 102: Transport efficiencies may be possi
Page 103 and 104: 3. Transport and Storage Systems Tr
Page 105 and 106: same time, the potential problems o
Page 107 and 108: Figure 3.3 Articulated self-propell
Page 109 and 110: • The harvester will not have any
Page 111 and 112: Figure 3.7 Gross mass compared with
Page 113 and 114: external factors dramatically impac
Page 115: Figure 3.11 The effect of haulout t
Page 119 and 120: Figure 3.15 shows an example of the
Page 121 and 122: Road distance one way < 20 km 70 km
Page 123 and 124: Haul distance is largely outside th
Page 125 and 126: 3.6 Recommendations The nature of t
Page 127 and 128: • The strategy offered lower tota
Page 129 and 130: sugarcane billets are such that wit
Page 131 and 132: • Transfer the whole tree product
Page 133 and 134: Figure 4.5(b) Energy balance of con
Page 135 and 136: 2010). Table 4.2 presents a summary
Page 137 and 138: 4.4.2 Activated charcoal Activated
Page 139 and 140: Nett Product Value ($/t) $475.00 $
Page 141 and 142: Table 4.9 presents an estimation of
Page 143 and 144: • Oil from leaf @ $2/kg • Synth
Page 145 and 146: • The mallee oil would be extract
Page 147 and 148: 5. Industry and Business Structures
Page 149 and 150: is conducted into tariff levels on
Page 151 and 152: Bx is % brix in first expressed jui
Page 153 and 154: Hildebrand (2002) estimated that th
Page 155 and 156: also has a flow on effect to the sp
Page 157 and 158: Sugar Industry Illustrative Example
Page 159 and 160: with super size multi-lift bins ove
Page 161 and 162: farmer vs. harvester) is the next l
Page 163 and 164: 6. Supply Chain Planning and Manage
Page 165 and 166: Figure 6.1 Building blocks of the s
Page 167 and 168:
weighed against the costs of operat
Page 169 and 170:
• There is close contact between
Page 171 and 172:
6.4 Planning, Management Tools and
Page 173 and 174:
• Harvest and transport logistics
Page 175 and 176:
interface. The system allows users
Page 177 and 178:
Case Study 6.2 - Model Application
Page 179 and 180:
Relationships between sectors and p
Page 181 and 182:
7. Supply Chain Modelling and Econo
Page 183 and 184:
It was assumed that there was a fif
Page 185 and 186:
Table 7.2 Scenario two capital equi
Page 187 and 188:
Table 7.4 Fuel burn rates harvester
Page 189 and 190:
Figure 7.5 Effect of capital equipm
Page 191 and 192:
Figure 7.7 Effect of annual tonnes
Page 193 and 194:
30 1.8 7.0 12.3 17.5 50 1.1 4.3 7.6
Page 195 and 196:
8. Conclusions and Recommendations
Page 197 and 198:
Biomass bulk density has a large im
Page 199 and 200:
Vehicles used for infield haulout w
Page 201 and 202:
This can be compared with harvest a
Page 203 and 204:
While diversification can add value
Page 205 and 206:
Appendix 1: Comparative Assessment
Page 207 and 208:
and transport conditions. Billet le
Page 209 and 210:
that cane production is the most pr
Page 211 and 212:
on sugar only, other proceeds (mola
Page 213 and 214:
References Agnew, J 2002. A Partici
Page 215 and 216:
Enecon 2001. Integrated Tree Proces
Page 217 and 218:
Keating, BA, Antony, G, Brennan, LE
Page 219 and 220:
Ridge, DR and Linedale, AL, 1997. T
Page 221:
Willcox, T, Hussey, B, Chapple, D a
show all

Download (4Mb) - USQ ePrints - University of Southern Queensland

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?