Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Biomass Storage Options Influence Net Energy and Emissions of Cellulosic Ethanol

  • Published:
BioEnergy Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Incremental biomass losses during the harvest and storage of energy crops decrease the effective crop yield at the biorefinery gate. These losses can affect the environmental performance of biofuels from cellulosic feedstocks by indirectly increasing agricultural inputs per unit of fuel and increasing direct emissions of pollutants during biomass decomposition in storage. In this study, we expand the Greenhouse Gases, Regulated Emissions, and Energy Use in Transportation (GREETTM) model to include parameters for harvest and storage of dry bales, bale silage, and bulk silage and examine the potential impact of the biomass supply chain on energy use and air pollutants from cellulosic ethanol from corn stover, switchgrass, and miscanthus feedstocks. A review of storage methods shows substantial differences in expected losses (4.2 to 16.0 %) and variability. Model results indicate that inclusion of feedstock harvest and storage pathways increases net fossil energy consumption (0.03–0.14 MJ/MJ) and greenhouse gas emissions (2.3–10 g CO2e/MJ) from cellulosic ethanol compared to analyses that exclude feedstock losses, depending on the storage scenario selected. Greenhouse gas emissions were highest from bulk ensiled silage and bale silage pathways, driven by direct emissions of greenhouse gasses during storage and material use, respectively. Storage of dry bales indoors or under cover minimizes emissions. This report emphasizes the need to increase the detail of biofuel production models and address areas of great uncertainty in the biomass supply chain, such as biomass decomposition emissions and dry matter losses.

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
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

DML:

Dry matter loss

GHG:

Greenhouse gas

GREET:

Greenhouse Gases and Regulated Emissions in Transportation

HDPE:

High-density polyethylene

LCA:

Life cycle analysis

LDPE:

Low-density polyethylene

LRB:

Large round bale

LSB:

Large square bale

PM:

Particulate matter

VOC:

Volatile organic compounds

References

  1. U.S. Billion-Ton Update: Biomass Supply for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry (2011) Oak Ridge National Laboratory. U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge

    Google Scholar 

  2. Emery IR, Mosier NS (2012) The impact of dry matter loss during herbaceous biomass storage on net greenhouse gas emissions from biofuels production. Biomass Bioenergy 39:237–246

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Shinners KJ, Binversie BN, Muck RE, Weimer PJ (2007) Comparison of wet and dry corn stover harvest and storage. Biomass Bioenergy 31:211–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Hess RJ, Kenney KL, Ovard LP, Searcy EM, Wright CT (2009) Commodity-scale production of an infrastructure-compatible bulk solid from herbaceous lignocellulosic biomass. Uniform-format bioenergy feedstock supply system design report series. Idaho National Laboratory, Idaho Falls

    Google Scholar 

  5. Sokhansanj S, Turhollow AF, Stephen J, Stumborg M, Fenton J, Mani S (2008) Analysis of five simulated straw harvest scenarios. Can Biosyst Eng 50(2):27–37

    Google Scholar 

  6. POET-DSM (2013) Biomass resources. POET-DSM. http://poetdsm.com/biomass. Accessed August 20, 2013

  7. Tietz N (2012) Custom-baling corn stover for ethanol plants presents opportunities and challenges. Hay & Forage Grower. http://hayandforage.com/marketing/heavy-duty-biomass-harvesting. Accessed February 24, 2014

  8. McDonald P, Henderson AR, Heron SJE (1991) The biochemistry of silage (second edition), 2nd edn. Chalcombe Publications, Marlow

    Google Scholar 

  9. Shinners KJ, Wepner AD, Muck RE, Weimer PJ (2011) Aerobic and anaerobic storage of single-pass, chopped corn stover. Bioenergy Res 4:61–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Shinners KJ, Boettcher GC, Muck RE, Weimer PJ, Casler MD (2010) Harvest and storage of two perennial grasses as biomass feedstocks. Trans ASABE 53(2):359–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Regulation of Fuels and Fuel Additives: Changes to Renewable Fuel Standard Program; Final Rule (2010). vol 75. Federal Register, Washington

  12. Wang M, Han J, Dunn JB, Cai H, Elgowainy A (2012) Well-to-wheels energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of ethanol from corn, sugarcane, and cellulosic biomass for US use. Environ Res Lett 7(4):045905

  13. Jackson HA, Lessard JR (1977) Effects of moisture content on corn silage density and storage losses in a large tower silo. Can Agric Eng 19(2):57–58

    Google Scholar 

  14. Weinberg ZG, Ashbell G (1994) Changes in gas composition in corn silages in bunker silos during storage and feedout. Can Agric Eng 36(3):155–158

    Google Scholar 

  15. Henderson AR, McDonald P (1974) The effect of delayed sealing on fermentation and losses during ensilage. J Sci Food Agric 26(5):653–667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Henderson AR, McDonald P, Woolford MK (1972) Chemical changes and losses during the ensilage of wilted grass treated with formic acid. J Sci Food Agric 23(9):1079–1087

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mayne CS, Gordon FJ (1986) Effect of harvesting system on nutrient losses during silage making. 2. In-silo losses. Grass Forage Sci 41:341–351

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. McDonald P, Stirling AC, Henderson AR, Whittenbury R (1962) Fermentation studies on wet herbage. J Sci Food Agric 13:581–590

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Richey CB, Liljedahl JB, Lechtenberg VL (1982) Corn stover harvest for energy production. Trans ASAE 25(4)

  20. McCormick ME, Cuomo GJ, Blouin DC (1998) Annual ryegrass stored as balage, haylage, or hay for lactating dairy cows. J Prod Agric 11(3):293–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. McDonald P, Henderson AR, MacGregor AW (1968) Chemical changes and losses during the ensilage of wilted grass. J Sci Food Agric 19:125–132

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. McDonald P, Henderson AR, Whittenbury R (1966) The effect of temperature on ensilage. J Sci Food Agric 17:476–480

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Monti A, Fazio S, Venturi G (2009) The descrepancy between plot and field yields: harvest and storage losses of switchgrass. Biomass Bioenergy 33:841–847

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kerr JAM, Brown WO (1965) A comparison of nutrient losses in baled hay made from forage—harvested, crimped or tedded swards with those in Barn Drying. J Br Grassl Soc 20:156–163

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Collins A, Allinson DW (1995) Growth-rate of herbage initially dominated by Reed Canarygrass or Tall Fescue. J Prod Agric 8(2):227–232

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sanderson MA, Egg RP, Wiselogel AE (1997) Biomass losses during harvest and storage of switchgrass. Biomass Bioenergy 12(2):107–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Cameron IH (1966) Dry matter and quality changes during and after making pasture hay. Aust J Exp Agric Anim Husb 6(23):394–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Coble CG, Egg RP (1987) Dry matter losses during hay production and storage of sweet sorghum used for methane production. Biomass 14:209–217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Huhnke RL (1990) Round bale wheat hay storage losses. Appl Eng Agric 6(5):569–574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Khanchi A, Jones CL, Sharma B (2009) Characteristics and compositional variation in round and square sorghum bales under different storage conditions. Paper presented at the ASABE Annual International Meeting, Reno, 21-24

  31. Verma LR, Nelson BD (1983) Changes in round bales during storage. Trans ASABE 26(2):328–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Johnson LM, Harrison JH, Davidson D, Mahanna WC, Shinners KJ (2003) Corn silage management: effects of hybrid, maturity, innoculation, and mechanical processing on fermentation characteristics. J Dairy Sci 86:287–308

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Muck RE, Holmes B (2007) Packing bunkers and piles to maximize forage preservation. In: Sixth International Dairy Housing Conference Proceeding, ASABE, Minneapolis, 16-18

  34. Henk LL, Linden JC (1994) Silage processing of forage biomass to alcohol fuel. In: Himmel ME, Baker JO, Overend RP (eds) Enzymatic conversion of biomass for fuels production, vol 566. ACS Symposium Series, American Chemical Society, pp 391–410

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Singh K, Honig H, Wermke M, Zimmer E (1996) Fermentation pattern and changes in cell wall constituents of straw-forage silages, straws and partners during storage. Anim Feed Sci Technol 61:137–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Atchison JE, Hettenhaus JR (2004) Innovative methods for corn stover collecting, handling, storing and transporting. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden

    Google Scholar 

  37. Shah A, Darr MJ, Webster K, Hoffman C (2011) Outdoor storage characteristics of single-pass large square corn stover bales in Iowa. Energies 4:1687–1695

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. McCormick ME, Han KJ, Moreira VR, Blouin DC, Forbes S (2011) Forage conservation efficiency and lactation response to bahiagrass conserved as barn-stored hay, outdoor-stored hay, or baleage. J Dairy Sci 94:2500–2507

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Lechtenberg VL, Smith WH, Parsons SD, Petritz DC (1974) Storage and feeding of large hay packages for beef cows. J Anim Sci 39(6):1011–1015

    Google Scholar 

  40. Herrmann C, Heiermann M, Idler C (2011) Effects of ensiling, silage additives and storage period on methane formation of biogas crops. Bioresour Technol 102:5153–5161

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Wyss U, Schild GJ, Honig H (1991) The influence of three different round balers on gas production and fermentation pattern of big bale silage. Paper presented at the Proceedings of a Conference on Forage Conservation towards 2000, Braunschweig

  42. Larson JA, Mooney DF, English BC, Tyler DD (2010) Estimating the impacts of storage dry matter losses on switchgrass production. Paper presented at the Agricultural & Applied Economics Association 2010 AAEA, CAES, & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, Denver, 25-27

  43. Subramanyan K, Wu Y, Diwekar UM, Wang MQ (2008) New stochastic simulation capability applied to the GREET model. Int J Life Cycle Assess 13(3):278–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Rotz CA, Muck RE (1994) Changes in forage quality during harvest and storage. Paper presented at the National Conference on Forage Quality, Evaluation, and Utilization, University of Nebraska, Lincoln, 13-15

  45. Ebadian M, Sowlai T, Sokhansanj S, Stumborg M, Townley-Smith L (2011) A new simulation model for multi-agricultural biomass logistics system in bioenergy production. Biosyst Eng 110:280–290. doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2011.08.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Shinners KJ, Huenink BM, Muck RE, Albrecht KA (2009) Storage characteristics of large round and square alfalfa bales: low-moisture wrapped bales. Trans ASABE 52(2):401–407

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Kering MK, Butler TJ, Biermacher JT, Guretzky JA (2012) Biomass yield and nutrient removal rates of perennial grasses under nitrogen fertilization. Bioenergy Res 5:61–70. doi:10.1007/s12155-011-9167-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Hellebrand HJ (1998) Emission of nitrous oxide and other trace gases during composting of grass and green waste. J Agric Eng Res 69:365–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. De Klein C, Novoa RSA, Ogle S, Smith KA, Rochette P, Wirth TC, McConkey BG, Mosier AR, Rypdal K (2006) N2O emissions from managed soils, and CO2 emissions from lime and urea application. In: IPCC (ed) Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Use, vol 4. 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. p 54

  50. Spoelstra SF (1985) Nitrate in silage. Grass Forage Sci 40(1):1–11

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Kumar A, Sokhansanj S (2007) Switchgrass (Panicum vigratum, L.) delivery to a biorefinery using integrated biomass supply analysis and logistics (IBSAL) model. Bioresour Technol 98:1033–1044

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Wang Z, Dunn JB, Han J, Wang MQ (2013) Material and energy flows in the production of cellulosic feedstocks for biofuels for the GREET model. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne

    Book  Google Scholar 

  53. Keoleian G, Miller S, De Kleine R, Fang A, Mosley J (2011) Life cycle material data update for the GREET model. Argonne National Laboratory, Darien

    Google Scholar 

  54. Wang M, Han J, Haq Z, Tyner WE, Wu M, Elgowainy A (2011) Energy and greenhouse gas emissions effects of corn and cellulosic ethanol with technology improvements and land use changes. Biomass Bioenergy 35:1885–1896

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Dunn JB, Eason J, Wang MQ (2011) Updated sugarcane and switchgrass parameters in the GREET model. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne

    Google Scholar 

  56. Meiering AG, Courtin MG, Spoelstra SF, Pahlow G, Honig H, Subden RE, Zimmer E (1988) Fermentation kinetics and toxic gas production of silages. Trans ASAE 31(2):613–621

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Wang LC, Burris RH (1960) Mass spectrometric study of nitrogenous gases produced by silage. Agric Food Chem 8(3):239–242

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Montes F, Hafner S, Rotz CA Measuring emissions of volatile organic compounds from silage. In: 2009 ASABE Annual International Meeting, ASABE, Reno, 21-24

  59. Hoglund C (1965) Some economic considerations in selecting storage systems for haylage and silage for dairy farms. Agricultural Economics Report. Michigan State University, East Lansing

    Google Scholar 

  60. Sokhansanj S, Turhollow A, Wilkerson E (2008) Development of the Integrated Biomass Supply Analysis and Logistics Model (IBSAL). Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Bioenergy Technologies Office of the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Office of the US Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. The authors thank the support and guidance of Kristen Johnson, Alicia Lindauer, and Zia Haq of the Department of Energy’s Bioenergy Technology Office. We also extend thanks to Professor Nathan Mosier of Purdue University for his contributions to the design and coordination of the study.

Authors’ Contributions

IE developed biomass storage and supply chain scenarios, including the distribution functions, and helped draft the manuscript. JD conducted the analyses and helped draft the manuscript. JH coded the GREET model revisions and helped draft the manuscript. MW provided input to the study design, review, and authorship of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Agricultural and Biological Engineering, Purdue University, 225 South University Street, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Isaac Emery

  2. Systems Assessment Group, Energy Systems Division, Argonne National Laboratory, 9700 South Cass Ave, Argonne, IL, 60439, USA

    Jennifer B. Dunn, Jeongwoo Han & Michael Wang

Authors
  1. Isaac Emery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer B. Dunn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeongwoo Han
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jennifer B. Dunn.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Emery, I., Dunn, J.B., Han, J. et al. Biomass Storage Options Influence Net Energy and Emissions of Cellulosic Ethanol. Bioenerg. Res. 8, 590–604 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-014-9539-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-014-9539-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation