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

distance of approximately 20-25 km is considered an upper limit for this strategy. Whilst the reduction
in load density and increased transport costs making the system less viable as distance increases, the
reduction in cane loss at mill based cleaning systems relative to harvester based cleaning is a major
positive economic consideration (Whiteing, 2001) .
All trash recovery options (in all crops) can be argued to have agronomic impact because of the
removal from the field of organic matter and plant nutrients, however other effects such as soil
temperatures also significantly impact on the optimum strategies. In cold environments for sugarcane
trash must be either physically removed or burned to maximise soil temperatures for reliable crop
ratooning.
Figure 4.1 illustrates an operation where cane trash is being collected with forage harvesters in Brazil
for cogeneration. Baling and forage harvesting are both methods whereby very significant volumes of
trash are collected for this use. Sugarcane trash volumes are high relative to many other crops and the
product is highly abrasive, so the equipment used has typically been developed specifically for the
application, although the design concepts are based on normal forage machines.
Figure 4.1
Trash recovery for cogeneration in Brazil by baling the trash after machine
harvesting.
Figure 4.2 Trash recovery from integrated trash and cane delivery in a large sugarmill in
Brazil.
Figure 4.2 illustrates a trash recovery unit in Brazil for chopper harvested cane. This system is at a
large sugarmill, with a daily cane crushing capacity of over 25,000 tonnes and with trash recovery
being in the order of 2,500 tonnes/day. The physical and aerodynamic properties of cane trash and
105