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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Because of the extraction of the oil component, an alternative boutique use of leaf and twig could be as feedstock for compost however additional agricultural waste would probably be required to achieve correct component ratios. Some synergies may exist with abattoirs with respect to the production of high value compost however the concentrations of heavy metals in the leaf material and or extracted liquid could be an issue. Table 4.3 presents data on the production of mallee oil. The extraction costs are nominal based on the energy requirement for the extraction process on gas costs only. In an industrial process, energy would be supplied from combustion of used product, with the nominal saving being absorbed by fixed and variable costs associated with the process. Table 4.3 Value of feedstock components for Mallee Oil for boutique and industrial use Oil Value ($/kg) $10 $2 Tree component leaf & twig whole tree leaf & twig whole tree Extraction cost ($/kg) $ 0.84 $ 1.08 $ 0.84 $ 1.08 Product Value ($/kg) $9.16 $8.92 $1.16 $0.92 Product yield (kg/gt) 18.0 10.5 18.0 10.5 Value/gt freshweight at $ 164.81 $ 93.69 $ 20.81 $ 9.69 factory Residual product Wet leaf & twig + separated woodchip Wet leaf & twig & woodchip Wet leaf & twig + separated woodchip Wet leaf & twig & woodchip Residual Product Value * 100% of woodchip * 65% of leaf & twig * 90% of woodchip * 65% of leaf & twig * 100% of woodchip * 65% of leaf & twig * 90% of woodchip * 65% of leaf & twig Table 4.3 indicates that: • For the boutique market with an oil price of $10/kg ex-factory, feedstock value at the factory is in the order of $165/green tonne for leaf and twig components of the tree if pre-separated, or $94/green tonne for the whole tree if the entire harvested product is processes. • The value of leaf and twig based on industrial oil prices are $21/green tonne for leaf and twig if separated prior to the process or $10/green tonne if the whole tree is run through the extraction process. The increased thermal requirement to process the whole tree instead of leaf (and twigs) only equates to approximately $0.24/kg of oil. Whilst this is barely significant in the case of boutique oil, it is highly significant in the economics of industrial oil. These costs indicate that oil extraction for industrial use is not a viable “stand-alone” use of harvested malle in a large scale industry; however oil extraction from the separated leaf and twig material can potentially give an additional income stream. After oil extraction has been undertaken: • If pre-separated, the full value of the woodchip would still be available, however if the woodchip was subjected to steam extraction, some degradation would have occurred, along with an increase in moisture content; • The reduced alkali levels in leaf and twig material can be anticipated to reduce potential problems associated with combustion of these products, thus potentially increasing their value; • Work at Curtin University ( http://asdi.curtin.edu.au/csrp/projects/4c2.html) indicates that after oil extraction, leaf and twig material actually convert into a higher value metallurgical charcoal than wood. • To capitalise on this value, it would be necessary to efficiently re-dry and process the material. The energy required to achieve this would be equivalent to combusting approximately 35% of the material. 113
4.4.2 Activated charcoal Activated charcoal is used for water purification and some minerals processing. It is a high value product, however the market is limited. Typically activated charcoal production equates to approximately 4% of initial feedstock mass. To meet various technical requirements the feedstock must be “clean” woodchip. The process is highly exothermic. A “process cost” of $0.50/kg of final product is assumed for capital and operating costs of the facility required to perform the process, however significant energy is released in the process, with this potentially being captured as thermal energy or chemical energy (syn gas or bio-oil). Table 4.4 indicates that the value of feedstock for the production of activated charcoal would then be in the order of $100/green tonne for clean woodchip or $41/green tonne for chopped whole tree product, which would have to be separated into components prior to use. Table 4.4 Value of feedstock components for activated charcoal. Product Value ($/kg) $ 3.00 Component Used Woodchip Extraction cost ($/kg) $ 0.50 Product Value ($/kg) $2.50 Product yield (% of freshweight) 4.1% Value/t freshweight separated woodchip $ 102.60 Value/t freshweight whole tree $ 41.04 Residual and co-products Heat syngas and bio-crude. Co-Product value App 80% of initial energy content as heat and combustables/feedstock. The production of activated charcoal results in significant heat production and production of syngas and bio-crude, with a significant proportion of the energy in the initial feedstock being liberated in these components. After the production of activated charcoal, significant further value can be extracted from the feedstock. 4.4.3 Metallurgical charcoal Metallurgical Charcoal is used in a number of processes and is formed by stopping the reduction process earlier than for activated charcoal, which is actually produced in a two stage process. The recovered mass of metallurgical charcoal is typically around 21% of woodchip freshweight (at 42% MC), and leaf and twig would be considered to be of limited value, however as noted above the research at Curtin University indicates that extracted leaf and twig material has enhanced value as a feedstock for metallurgical charcoal because of the properties of the charcoal produced. Table 4.5 indicates that at typical industrial prices for metallurgical charcoal of around $200/tonne. It is assumed that the process cost will be in the order of $25/tonne final product. Whilst woodchip is the assumed feedstock, some price premium could possibly also be achieved by the production of block charcoal. 114
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 and 116: Figure 3.11 The effect of haulout t
Page 117 and 118: 3.3 Road Transport 3.3.1 Configurat
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: 2010). Table 4.2 presents a summary
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?