Mechanised harvesting of short-rotation coppices. (September 2017)
- Record Type:
- Journal Article
- Title:
- Mechanised harvesting of short-rotation coppices. (September 2017)
- Main Title:
- Mechanised harvesting of short-rotation coppices
- Authors:
- Vanbeveren, Stefan P.P.
Spinelli, Raffaele
Eisenbies, Mark
Schweier, Janine
Mola-Yudego, Blas
Magagnotti, Natascia
Acuna, Mauricio
Dimitriou, Ioannis
Ceulemans, Reinhart - Abstract:
- Abstract: Short-rotation coppice (SRC) is an important source of woody biomass for bioenergy. Despite the research carried out on several aspects of SRC production, many uncertainties create barriers to farmers establishing SRC plantations. One of the key economic sources of uncertainty is harvesting methods and costs; more specifically, the performance of contemporary machine methods is reviewed. We collected data from 25 literature references, describing 166 field trials. Three harvesting systems predominate: 127 used single pass cut-and-chip harvesters, 16 used double pass cut-and-store harvesters, 22 used the cut-and-bale harvester, and one study used a cut-and-billet harvester. Mean effective material capacity (EMC) was 30 Mg fresh weight h -1 (cut-and-chip technique), 19 Mg fresh weight h -1 (cut-and-store technique) and 14 Mg fresh weight h -1 (cut-and-bale technique). However, this comparison does not consider engine power, which varies with harvesting technique; cut-and-chip harvesters are by far the most powerful (>200 kW). When limiting harvesters to a maximum engine power of 200 kW, cut-and-chip harvesters achieved the lowest EMC (5 Mg fresh weight h -1 ), but they also perform a higher degree of material processing (cutting and chipping) than cut-and-store harvesters (only cutting) or than the cut-and-bale harvester (cutting and baling). The trend in commercial machinery is towards increased engine power for cut-and-chip and cut-and-store harvesters. No trendsAbstract: Short-rotation coppice (SRC) is an important source of woody biomass for bioenergy. Despite the research carried out on several aspects of SRC production, many uncertainties create barriers to farmers establishing SRC plantations. One of the key economic sources of uncertainty is harvesting methods and costs; more specifically, the performance of contemporary machine methods is reviewed. We collected data from 25 literature references, describing 166 field trials. Three harvesting systems predominate: 127 used single pass cut-and-chip harvesters, 16 used double pass cut-and-store harvesters, 22 used the cut-and-bale harvester, and one study used a cut-and-billet harvester. Mean effective material capacity (EMC) was 30 Mg fresh weight h -1 (cut-and-chip technique), 19 Mg fresh weight h -1 (cut-and-store technique) and 14 Mg fresh weight h -1 (cut-and-bale technique). However, this comparison does not consider engine power, which varies with harvesting technique; cut-and-chip harvesters are by far the most powerful (>200 kW). When limiting harvesters to a maximum engine power of 200 kW, cut-and-chip harvesters achieved the lowest EMC (5 Mg fresh weight h -1 ), but they also perform a higher degree of material processing (cutting and chipping) than cut-and-store harvesters (only cutting) or than the cut-and-bale harvester (cutting and baling). The trend in commercial machinery is towards increased engine power for cut-and-chip and cut-and-store harvesters. No trends in EMC were documented for the recently developed cut-and-bale harvesting technique, which is presently produced in one version only. Field stocking (5–157 Mg fresh weight ha -1 in the reviewed studies) has a significant effect on harvester EMC. Lower field stocking can constrain the maximum EMC achieved by the machine given that harvesting speed can only be increased to a point. While the reviewed studies did not contain sufficient harvesting cost data for a thorough analysis, harvesting costs ranged between 6 and 99 € Mg -1 fresh weight. … (more)
- Is Part Of:
- Renewable & sustainable energy reviews. Volume 76(2017)
- Journal:
- Renewable & sustainable energy reviews
- Issue:
- Volume 76(2017)
- Issue Display:
- Volume 76, Issue 2017 (2017)
- Year:
- 2017
- Volume:
- 76
- Issue:
- 2017
- Issue Sort Value:
- 2017-0076-2017-0000
- Page Start:
- 90
- Page End:
- 104
- Publication Date:
- 2017-09
- Subjects:
- EFC effective field capacity (ha h-1) -- EMC effective material capacity (Mg h-1) -- h hour -- ha hectare -- kW kilowatt -- MC moisture content (%) -- Mg megagram -- SRC short-rotation coppice -- y year
Baling -- Chipping -- Costs -- Cut -- Effective machine capacity -- Effective field capacity
Renewable energy sources -- Periodicals
Power resources -- Periodicals
Énergies renouvelables -- Périodiques
Ressources énergétiques -- Périodiques
333.794 - Journal URLs:
- http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/13640321 ↗
http://www.elsevier.com/journals ↗
http://www.journals.elsevier.com/renewable-and-sustainable-energy-reviews ↗ - DOI:
- 10.1016/j.rser.2017.02.059 ↗
- Languages:
- English
- ISSNs:
- 1364-0321
- Deposit Type:
- Legaldeposit
- View Content:
- Available online (eLD content is only available in our Reading Rooms) ↗
- Physical Locations:
- British Library DSC - 7364.186000
British Library DSC - BLDSS-3PM
British Library HMNTS - ELD Digital store - Ingest File:
- 1162.xml