Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Delivered Biomass Costs of Honey Mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) for Bioenergy Uses in the South Central USA

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Honey mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa Torr.), a multistemmed tree that grows on grasslands and rangelands in the South Central USA (Texas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico), may have potential as a bioenergy feedstock due to a large amount of existing standing biomass and significant regrowth potential following initial harvest. The objective of this research was to determine the cost to harvest, store, and deliver mesquite biomass feedstock to a bioelectricity plant under the assumption that the rights to harvest mesquite could be acquired in long-term leases. The advantage of mesquite and similar rangeland shrubs as bioenergy feedstocks is that they do not grow on land better suited for growing food or fiber and thus will not impact agricultural food markets as corn grain ethanol has done. In addition, there are no cultivation costs. Results indicated that mesquite biomass density (Mg ha−1) and harvesting costs are major factors affecting cost of delivered biomass. Annual biomass consumption by the bioelectricity plant and percent of the total system area that contains biomass density that is suitable for harvest significantly affected land- related factors including total system area needed per bioelectricity plant and transport costs. Simulation results based on actual biomass density in Texas showed that higher and more spatially consistent biomass density would be an important factor in selecting a potential location for the bioelectricity plant. Harvesting mesquite has the potential for bioenergy feedstock given certain densities and total land areas since higher harvest and transport costs are offset by essentially no production costs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. USDA (2005) Biomass as feedstock for a bioenergy and bioproducts industy: the technical feasibility of a billion-ton annual supply. United States of Department of Agriculture. http://feedstockreview.ornl.gov/pdf/billion_ton_vision.pdf. Accessed 30 Sept 2010

  2. Green C, Avitabile V, Farrell EP, Byrne KA (2006) Reporting harvested wood products in national greenhouse gas inventories: implications for Ireland. Biomass Bioenergy 30:105–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tilman D, Hill J, Lehman C (2006) Carbon-negative biofuels from low-input high-diversity grassland biomass. Science 314:1598–1600

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wright LL (1994) Production technology status of woody and herbaceous crops. Biomass Bioenergy 6:191–209

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Van Auken OW (2000) Shrub invasions of North American semiarid grasslands. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 31:197–215

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Felker P (1984) Economic, environmental, and social advantages of intensively managed short rotation mesquite (Prosopis spp.) biomass energy farms. Biomass Bioenergy 5:65–77

    Google Scholar 

  7. SCS (1998) Texas brush inventory. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Services Misc Report, Temple, TX, USA

  8. Xu W, Li Y, Carraway B (2008) Estimation of woody biomass availability for energy in Texas. College Station: Texas Forest Service Report. http://texasforestservice.tamu.edu/main/article.aspx?id=100&ptaxid=146&dtaxid=168&taxid=240. Accessed 30 Sept 2011

  9. Ansley RJ, Mirik M, Castellano MJ (2010) Structural biomass partitioning in regrowth and undisturbed mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa): implications for bioenergy uses. Glob Change Bio Bioenergy 2:26–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ansley RJ, Wu XB, Kramp BA (2001) Observation: long-term increases in mesquite canopy cover in a north Texas savanna. J Range Manage 54:171–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Mapemba LD, Epplin FM, Taliaferro CM, Huhnke RL (2007) Bioelectricity plant feedstock production on conservation reserve program land. Rev Agr Econ 29:227–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Haque M, Epplin FM, Taliaferro CM (2009) Nitrogen and harvest frequency effect on yield and cost for four perennial grasses. Agron J 101:1463–1469

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Downing M, Graham RL (1996) The potential supply and cost of biomass from energy crops in the Tennessee valley authority region. Biomass Bioenerg 11:283–303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Epplin FM (1996) Cost to produce and deliver switchgrass biomass to an ethanol-conversion facility in the southern plains of the United States. Biomass Bioenerg 11:459–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Morris BD (2008) Economic feasibility of ethanol production from sweet sorghum juice in Texas. Thesis, Texas A&M University

  16. Aravindhakshan SC, Epplin FM, Taliaferro CM (2010) Economics of switchgrass and miscanthus relative to coal as feedstock for generating electricity. Biomass Bioenerg 34:1375–1383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. McLaughlin SB, de la Torre Ugarte DG, Garten CT (2002) High-value renewable energy from prairie grasses. Environ Sci Technol 36:2122–2129

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Whisenant SG, Burzlaff DF (1978) Predicting green weight of mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa Torr.). J Ecol 56:1–24

    Google Scholar 

  19. Felker P, Clark PR, Osborn JF, Cannell GH (1982) Biomass estimation in a young stand of mesquite (Prosopis spp.), ironwood (Olneya tesota), palo verde (Cercidium floridium and Parkinsonia aculeate), and Leucaena (Leucaena leucocephal). J Range Manage 35:87–89

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bennett AS, Anex RP (2009) Production, transportation and milling costs of sweet sorghum as a feedstock for centralized bioethanol production in the upper Midwest. Bioresour Technol 100:1595–1607

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Chen W, Annamalai K, Ansley RJ, Mirik M (2012) Updraft fixed bed gasification of mesquite and juniper wood samples. Energy 41:454–461

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ansley RJ, Castellano MJ (2006) Strategies for savanna restoration in the southern Great Plains: effects of fire and herbicides. Restor Ecol 14:420–427

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Teague WR, Dowhower SL (2003) Patch dynamics under rotational and continuous grazing management in large, heterogeneous paddocks. J Arid Environ 53:211–229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Geyer WA (2006) Biomass production in the central Great Plains USA under various coppice regimes. Biomass Bioenergy 30:778–783

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Voets T, Kuppens T, Cornelissen T, Thewys T (2011) Economics of electricity and heat production by gasification or flash pyrolysis of short rotation coppice in Flanders (Belgium). Biomass Bioenergy 35:1912–1924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. The power plants around: biomass power plant. http://www.industcards.com/ppworld.htm. Accessed 3 Mar 2010

  27. McLauchlan RA, Felker P, Scherer G (1990) Economical harvesting of rangeland brush to produce energy/chemical feedstock. Proceedings of American Solar Energy Society Annual Conference, Austin , TX

  28. Buchholz T, Volk TA (2011) Improving the profitability of willow crops-identifying opportunities with a Crop Budget Model. Bioenerg Res 4:85–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ashton S, Jackson B, Schroeder R (2007) Cost factors in harvesting woody biomass. In: Hubbard W, Biles L, Mayfield M, Ashton S (eds) Sustainable forestry for bioenergy and bio-based products: trainers curriculum notebook. Southern Forest Research Partnership, Athens, pp 153–156

    Google Scholar 

  30. Graham RL, English BC, Noon CE (2000) A geographic information system-based modeling system for evaluating the cost of delivered energy crop feedstock. Biomass Bioenergy 18:309–329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Khanna M, Dhungana B, Clifton-Brown J (2008) Costs of producing miscanthus and switchgrass for bioenergy in Illinois. Biomass Bioenergy 32:482–493

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Teague WR, Kreuter UP, Grant WE, Diaz-Solis H, Kothmann MM (2009) Economic implications of maintaining rangeland ecosystem health in a semi-arid savanna. Ecol Econ 68:1417–1429

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Mirik M, Ansley RJ (2012) Comparison of ground-measured and image-classified mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) canopy cover. Rangeland Ecol Manag 65:85–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ansley RJ, Mirik M, Surber B, Park SC (2012) Canopy area and aboveground biomass of redberry juniper (Juniperus pinchotii Sudw.) trees: remote sensing implications. Rangeland Ecol Manag 65:189–195

    Google Scholar 

  35. Palma MA, Richardson JW, Roberson BE, Ribera LA, Outlaw J, Munster C (2011) Economic feasibility of a mobile fast pyrolysis system for sustainable bio-crude oil production. Int Food Agribusiness Manage Rev 14:1–16

    Google Scholar 

  36. Bhat MG, English B, Ojo M (1992) Regional costs of transporting biomass feedstocks. In: Cundiff JS (ed) Liquid Fuels from Renewable Resources: Proceedings of an Alternative Energy Conference, American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, Michigan, pp 50–57

  37. McLaughlin SB, Kszos AL (2005) Development of switchgrass (Panicum virgatum) as a bioenergy feedstock in the United States. Biomass Bioenergy 28:515–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ansley RJ, Pinchak WE, Teague WR, Kramp BA, Jones DL, Jacoby PW (2004) Long term grass yields following chemical control of honey mesquite. J Range Manage 57:49–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas AgriLife Research-Vernon, P.O. Box 1658, 11708 Hwy 70 S, Vernon, TX, 76385, USA

    Seong C. Park

  2. Ecosystem Science and Management, Texas AgriLife Research-Vernon, P.O. Box 1658, 11708 Hwy 70 S, Vernon, TX, 76385, USA

    R. James Ansley, Mustafa Mirik & Marc A. Maindrault

Authors
  1. Seong C. Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. James Ansley
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mustafa Mirik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marc A. Maindrault
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seong C. Park.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Park, S.C., Ansley, R.J., Mirik, M. et al. Delivered Biomass Costs of Honey Mesquite (Prosopis glandulosa) for Bioenergy Uses in the South Central USA. Bioenerg. Res. 5, 989–1001 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-012-9214-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-012-9214-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation