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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Figure 2.3 Ex-harvester mallee biomass (left) and after screening (right). The biomass in the left photo was produced by a drum chipper and the particles are relatively consistent in size. The biomass in the right photo was produced by a disc chipper, which tends to let more twigs pass through the chipper in long lengths. However drum chipper product still requires screening. The current prototype mallee harvester can harvest single stems up to 15 cm diameter, and with multiple stemmed coppice mallees, it appears to be able to process heavier mallees because the smaller separate stems are easier to handle than large single stems. Where mallees have grown beyond this specification, particularly in the older WA mallee crops, alternative systems (e.g. feller/buncher or hand falling, and separate chipping operations) will be required to bring these stands under control. 2.1.5 Discussion Whole-of-crop harvesting with all material (cane and trash) transported to the mill is the sugar system with the closest synergies with mallee harvesting operation. The challenge for sugarcane whole-ofcrop harvesting is in the logistical problems of handling increased volumes of material in harvesting and transport sectors. Sugarcane harvester design elements have to be changed to meet the requirements for harvesting whole-of-crop when compared to green and burnt cane. The sugarcane whole-of-crop harvesting supply chain needs a clear supply chain objective of crystal sugar plus energy, energy only or sugar only. Similarly the mallee supply chain objective will need to be clearly defined in terms of the product mix. The markets and products from mallee will be probably be multiple, as discussed in section 1.2.2 and Chapter 4. However it is unlikely that any separation of biomass into its fractions (wood chip, leaf, residues) will occur on the harvester as the fractions do not appear to be as readily separated as cane can be separated from trash. However for stockpiling and marketing purposes, separating wood chip from the rest of the biomass appears likely to be the minimum requirement and market development will help inform where post-harvest upgrading should take place. 2.2 Design Considerations Sugar system 35
During the last decade the harvesting sector has faced an unprecedented cost-price squeeze from rising capital, parts and fuel costs and labour availability. This has been compounded by a run of poor seasons which has impacted on harvester productivity. The harvesting sector is responding to these issues through a number of alternative design considerations to the standard Australian machine. These include modifications to suit a number of row spacings and wide-swath harvesting. Sugarcane harvesting is undertaken over a relatively long period (June to December), across a large geographic area (sub-tropics, dry-tropics, wet-tropics, varied soil types) along a narrow coastal strip with rainfall averages above 1000 mm per year. Hence, it is inevitable that harvesting will be conducted during or after periods of wet-weather. To cater for this, the sugarcane harvester is available in tracked configuration. 2.2.1 Row Spacing In conventional sugarcane farming systems, sugarcane is often grown on rows 1.5 m apart however there is significant variance, with large proportions of the crop in India, China and the traditional production areas in Brazil being on 1.0 m row spacing. The Case IH Austoft 7000 and 7700 cane harvesters have a wheel centre of 1860 mm and a track centre of 1880 mm respectively. Case IH 7000/7700 machines built prior to 2003 have a throat width of 900 mm. Machines built after 2003 have a throat width of 1080 mm. The Cameco (2500 series) and John Deere (3500 series) both have a wheel and track centre of 1880 mm. Cameco 2500 series have a throat width of 900 mm whilst, John Deere 3500 series machines have a throat width of 1000 mm. Therefore, current machinery is too much of an agronomic compromise for the current 1.5 m system (Figure 2.4). A number of controlled traffic row spacings have been adopted throughout the Australian industry. There are a number of slight variations to these but the most common include 1.85 m wheel spacing with single row and dual row, 2 m wheel spacing with dual rows at 800 mm centres, 2.4 m wheel spacing with dual rows at 1200 mm and a 3 m wheel spacing with dual rows at 1.5 m spacing. Figure 2.5 illustrates the 1.85 m wheel spacing configuration with dual rows. This spacing utilises current equipment and only requires minor modifications to the machines. Dual rows allow about a 23% increase in throughput at the same ground speed, however from an agronomic perspective the dual row at 500 mm is undesirable. 36
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: Whole-of-crop harvesting represents
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 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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?