Small-scale Forestry

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 287–303

Expanding the US Cornbelt Biomass Portfolio: Forester Perceptions of the Potential for Woody Biomass

  • John C. Tyndall
  • Lisa A. Schulte
  • Richard B. Hall
Article

Abstract

With the strong emergence of the bioeconomy in the US, there is growing interest in the ability of biomass production systems to meet the legislated demand for cellulosic biofuels. While corn grain will continue to comprise the primary feedstock for biofuel in the Cornbelt, it is unlikely that a single biomass feedstock will suit all the needs of an evolving bioenergy market; thus, the potential contribution of woody biomass should be considered. To meet informational needs, we conducted structured interviews with state-employed professional foresters along the Mississippi River corridor in five Corn Belt states (Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, and Wisconsin). Foresters were queried regarding the types of woody materials available, ecological considerations, the likely silvicultural systems that might support a biomass market, and their experiences with landowner management decisions as related to removing currently low-value material. Results suggest noteworthy interest in expanded woody biomass market systems within our study area. Furthermore, substantial opportunities exist to capture trimmings, small-diameter, and low-quality material in conjunction with on-going intermediate stand treatments or sawtimber harvests that are common in the region; capturing social and economic value while potentially contributing to long-term forest health. Costs for removing this material are estimated to range between $185–494/ha ($75–200/ac) depending on site conditions and accessibility. Such a wide range in costs (and therefore break-even biomass prices) suggests that some properties throughout the study region may be priced out of the market, at least in the initial stages of market development. Markets are distinctly lacking at present, however, and our interviewees suggested that market-pull will be required to organize a well-rounded infrastructure to harvest, process, store, and transport woody materials. This and future studies will be significant because they inform the enhancement of agricultural prosperity on small-to-medium farms and contribute to regional and national energy goals in ways that ideally improve, rather than diminish, the ecosystem services provided by woodlands in rowcrop-dominated landscapes.

Keywords

Bioenergy Family forests Interviews Private forestlands State-employed foresters 

References

  1. Aguilar F, Garrett HE (2009) Perspectives of woody biomass for energy: survey of state foresters, state energy biomass contacts, and national council of forestry association executives. J For 107(6):297–306Google Scholar
  2. Associated Press (AP) (2008) Hard times hit U.S. hardwood lumber industry. 6 April 2008 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23959105/. Accessed 31 October 2008
  3. Barmore R (2008) Biofeedstock availability and cost: a range fuels perspective. In: Presentation at the growing the bioeconomy: from foundational science to sustainable practice conference. Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa. 7–10 September 2008Google Scholar
  4. Barrett RP, Mebrahtu T, Hanover JW (1990) Black locust: a multi-purpose tree species for temperate climates. In: Janick J, Simon JE (eds) Advances in new crops. Timber Press, Portland, pp 278–283Google Scholar
  5. Becker DR, Skog K, Hellman A, Halvorson KE, Mace T (2009) An outlook for sustainable forest bioenergy production in the Lake States. Energy Policy 37:5687–5693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Benjamin J, Lilieholm RJ, Damery D (2009) Challenges and opportunities for the northeastern forest bioindustry. J For 107(3):125–131Google Scholar
  7. Bergman R, Zerbe J (2008) Primer on wood biomass for energy. USDA Forest Service, State and Private Forestry Technology Marketing Unit, Forest Products Laboratory, Madison, WisconsinGoogle Scholar
  8. Blossey B (1999) Before, during and after: the need for long-term monitoring in invasive plant species management. Biol Invasions 1:301–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Center for Paper Business and Industry Studies [CPBIS] (2007) Mills online. Online at: www.cpbis.gatech.edu/millsonline/datachange.htm. Accessed 22 September 2007
  10. Costellano PJ, Volk TA, Herrington LP (2009) Estimates of technically available woody biomass feedstock from natural forests and willow biomass crops for two locations in New York State. Biomass Bioenergy 33:393–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coyle DR, Hart ER, McMillin JD, Rule LC, Hall RB (2008) Effects of repeated cottonwood leaf beetle defoliation on Populus growth and economic potential over a full harvest rotation. For Ecol Manage 255:3365–3372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davis LS, Johnson KN, Bettinger P, Howard TE (2005) Forest management: to sustain ecological, economic, and social values, 4th edn—reissue (2005). Waveland Press, Inc, Long Grove, p 804Google Scholar
  13. Elemedorf WF, Luloff AE (2001) Using qualitative data collection methods when planning for community forests. J Arboric 27(3):139–151Google Scholar
  14. English BC, De La Torre Ugarte DG, Walsh ME, Hellwinkel C, Menard J (2006) Economic competitiveness of bioenergy production and effects on agriculture of the southern region. J Agric Appl Econ 38(2):389–402Google Scholar
  15. Erickson DL, Ryan RL, DeYoung R (2002) Woodlots in the rural landscape: landowner motivations and management attitudes in Michigan (USA) case study. Landsc Urban Plan 58:1001–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Evans AM (2008) Synthesis of knowledge from woody biomass removal case studies. Forest Guild, US Forest Service. September 2008. Online at: http://www.firescience.gov/projects/07-3-2-02/project/07-3-2-02_Biomass_Case_Studies_Report.pdf. Accessed 22 May 2010
  17. Evans AM, Perschel RT (2009) An assessment of biomass harvesting guidelines. Forest guild. Online at: http://www.forestguild.org/publications/research/2009/biomass_guidelines.pdf. Accessed 22 June 2009
  18. Farm Service Agency [FSA] (2010) Conservation programs. Conservation reserve program: emergency haying and grazing rules. Online guidelines. Online at: http://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/webapp?area=home&subject=copr&topic=crp-eg. Accessed 22 May 2010
  19. Galik C, Abt R, Wu Y (2009) Forest biomass supply in the Southeastern United States: implications for industrial roundwood and bioenergy production. J For 107(2):69–77Google Scholar
  20. Goerndt ME, Mize C (2008) Short-rotation woody biomass as a crop on marginal lands in Iowa. North J Appl For 25(2):82–86Google Scholar
  21. Graham RL, Nelson R, Sheehan J, Perlack RD, Wright LL (2007) Current and potential corn stover supplies. Agron J 99:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grigal DF, Berguson WE (1998) Soil carbon changes associated with short—rotation systems. Biomass Bioenergy 14:371–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Groom MJ, Gray EM, Townsend PA (2008) Biofuels and biodiversity: principles for creating better policies for biofuel production. Conserv Biol 22(3):602–609PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Halvorsen KE, Barnes JR, Solomon BD (2009) Upper Midwestern USA ethanol potential from cellulosic materials. Society Nat Resour 22(10):931–938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hammerschlag R (2006) Ethanol’s energy return on investment: a survey of the literature 1990–present. Environ Sci Technol 40(6):1744–1750PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hugosson M, Ingemarson F (2004) Objectives and motivations of small scale forest owners; theoretical modeling and qualitative assessment. Silva Fennica 38(20):217–231Google Scholar
  27. Ince PJ (2003) U.S. wood fiber demand and supply outlook. In: The long-term outlook for U.S. timber and forest products, findings and implications from the USDA Forest Service 5th RPA Timber Assessment. Forest Products Society, Madison, pp 17–28Google Scholar
  28. Iverson R, Cook EA, Graham RL (1994) Regional forest cover estimation via remote sensing: the calibration center concept. Landsc Ecol 1(3):159–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Johnson JMF, Coleman MD, Gesch R, Jaradat A, Mitchell R, Reicosky D, Wilhelm WW (2007) Biomass–bioenergy crops in the United States: a changing paradigm. Am J Plant Sci Biotechnol 1(1):1–28Google Scholar
  30. Keoleian GA, Volk TA (2005) Renewable energy from willow biomass crops: life cycle energy, environmental and economic performance. Crit Rev Plant Sci 24:385–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Knight K (2007) Effectiveness of naturally-occurring riparian forest buffers and grass filter strips at buffering concentrated flow from row crop fields to streams in northeast Missouri. Master of Science Thesis. Iowa State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  32. Knoot T, Schulte L, Tyndall J, Palik B (2010) The state, resilience, and potential future of disturbance-dependent oak forests as perceived by regional change agents. Ecol Soc (In press)Google Scholar
  33. Korsching P, Lasley P, Gruber T (2006) Iowa farm and rural life poll. 2006 Summary Report. Iowa State Extension. PM 2030, November 2006. Online http://www.extension.iastate.edu/Publications/PM2032.pdf. Accessed 3 November 2007
  34. Kuhn G, Rietveld W, Riemenschneider D (1998) Establishment and cultural guidelines for using hybrid tree species in agroforestry plantings. National Agroforestry Center Notes. AF Note 11Google Scholar
  35. Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture [LCSA] (2010) 2010 Ecological systems initiative competitive grants overview, project: assessment of woody biomass as a niche feedstock for biobased products in Iowa. Online at: http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/compgrants/E2010_ren.html. Accessed 5 October 2010
  36. Mayfield CA, Foster C, Smith CT, Gan JB, Fox S (2007) Opportunities, barriers, and strategies for forest bioenergy and bio-based product development in the Southern United States. Biomass Bioenergy 31(9):631–637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mcshea WJ, Heal WH, Devers P, Fearer T, Koch FH, Stauffer D, Waldon J (2007) Forestry matters: decline of oaks will impact wildlife in hardwood forests. J Wildl Manage 71(5):1717–1728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Milbrandt A (2005) Geographic perspective on the current biomass resource availability in the United States prepared under task no. HY55.2200. Technical Report NREL/TP-560-39181. December 2005. National Renewable Energy LabGoogle Scholar
  39. Miles MB, Huberman M (1994) Qualitative data analysis, 2nd edn. Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, California, p 352Google Scholar
  40. Moser WK, Leatherberry EC, Hansen MH, Butler B (2009) Farmers’ objectives toward their woodlands in the upper Midwest of the United States: implications for woodland volumes and diversity. Agroforestry Sys 75:49–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Munsell JF, Germain RH (2007) Woody biomass energy: an opportunity for silviculture on nonindustrial private forestlands in New York. J For 105(8):398–402Google Scholar
  42. Perlack RD, Wright LL, Turhollow AF, Graham RL (2005) Biomass for feedstock for bioenergy and bioproducts industry: the technical feasibility of a billion ton annual supply. A joint study sponsored by DOE and USDA. p 78Google Scholar
  43. Piller D (2008) Iowa railroads upgrade as shipping demands surge. Des Moines Register. 2 June 2008Google Scholar
  44. Renewable Fuel Association (RFA) (2009) Changing the climate: ethanol industry outlook 2008. RFA Washington DC. Online at: www.ethanolRFA.org/industry/outlook
  45. Riitters KH, Wickham JD, O’Neill RV, Jones KB, Smith ER, Coulston J, Wade TG, Smith JH (2002) Fragmentation of Continental United States Forests. Ecosystems 5:815–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Schoeppner MJ (2006) The timber industry: Minnesota’s perfect storm. Minnesota employment review. MN Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED). November 2006Google Scholar
  47. Schulte LA, Liebman M, Asbjornsen H, Crow TR (2006) Agroecosystem restoration through strategic integration of perennials. J Soil Water Conserv 61:164A–169AGoogle Scholar
  48. Schulte LA, Tyndall J, Hall R, Grubh K (2008) Rapid assessment of woody biomass capabilities in three regions of the U.S. Midwest. Prepared for the Office of Bio-renewable Programs, Iowa State University. Report facilitated by the Department of Natural Resource Ecology and Management, ISU. Online at: http://www.nrem.iastate.edu/landscape/Publications/FinalWoodyBiomassReport.pdf
  49. Secchi S, Tyndall J, Schulte LA, Asbjornsen H (2008) High crop prices and conservation – raising the stakes. J Soil Water Conserv 63(3):68a–73aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Strauss A, Corbin J (1990) Basics of qualitative research: grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, Newbury ParkGoogle Scholar
  51. Tyndall JC, Berg E, Colletti J (2010) Corn stover as a dedicated feedstock in Iowa’s bio-economy: an Iowa farmer survey. Biomass and bioenergy. Accepted for Special Issue due 2010 pending final Special Issue approval of B & B Editor: Biomass and BioenergyGoogle Scholar
  52. United State Department of Agriculture, National Agriculture Statistical Service (USDA NASS) (2009) Illinois timber prices: prices paid Illinois timber producers Nov 2008 through Feb 2009. Illinois Department of Natural Resources. 23 November 2009Google Scholar
  53. U.S. Forest Service [USFS] (2007a) Forest inventory mapmaker web-application version 3.0. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN. Online at: www.ncrs2.fs.fed.us/4801/fiadb/index.htm. Accessed 20 September 2007
  54. U.S. Forest Service [USFS] (2007b) Timber product output mapmaker web-application version 1.0. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research 30 Station Online at: www.ncrs2.fs.fed.us/4801/fiadb/index.htm. Accessed 20 September 2007
  55. Willyard CJ, Tikalsky SM (2006) Bioenergy in Wisconsin: the potential supply of forest biomass and its relationship to biodiversity. Wisconsin Focus on Energy Environmental Research Program; 2006. ECW Project Code: 4900-02-03, ERP Research, and Northern States PowerGoogle Scholar
  56. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources [WI DNR] (2010) Emerald ash borer: multi-site response guide. Wisconsin Emerald Ash Borer ProgramGoogle Scholar
  57. Wynsma B, Aubuchon R, Len D, Daugherty M, Gee E (2007) Woody biomass utilization desk guide. United States Forest Service, National Technology & Development Program. 2400—Forest management. September 2007, p 91Google Scholar
  58. Zerbe JI (1991) Liquid fuels from wood—ethanol, methanol, diesel. World Resour Rev 3(4):406–414Google Scholar
  59. Zerbe JI (2006) Thermal energy, electricity, and transportation fuels from wood. For Prod J 56(1):6–14Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Steve Harrison, John Herbohn 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • John C. Tyndall
    • 1
  • Lisa A. Schulte
    • 1
  • Richard B. Hall
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Natural Resource Ecology and ManagementIowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations