Biomass, spacing and planting design influence cut-and-chip harvesting in hybrid poplar
Hybrid poplar is a woody crop grown for the production of bioenergy, biofuels and bioproducts. Harvesting is often the largest single cost in the production system and the development and optimization of equipment is evolving. Here, the objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of a si...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Biomass & bioenergy 2017-09, Vol.106 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | |
---|---|
container_issue | |
container_start_page | |
container_title | Biomass & bioenergy |
container_volume | 106 |
creator | Eisenbies, Mark H. Volk, Timothy A. Espinoza, Jesus Gantz, Carlos Himes, Austin Posselius, John Shuren, Rich Stanton, Brian Summers, Bruce |
description | Hybrid poplar is a woody crop grown for the production of bioenergy, biofuels and bioproducts. Harvesting is often the largest single cost in the production system and the development and optimization of equipment is evolving. Here, the objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of a single-pass, cut-and-chip harvesting operation in commercial plantings that included four cultivars, two spacing treatments, and two coppice planting designs (dedicated, and interplanted with sawtimber). Approximately 15 h of harvesting using a New Holland 9080 forage harvester equipped with a purpose-built coppice header was monitored over four days. Stand biomass ranged between 34 and 78 Mg ha–1 of fresh biomass and effective material capacity (Cm) of the harvester ranged from 10 to 78 Mg h–1 of fresh biomass excluding headland activities. Tree spacing had a significant effect on Cm but cultivar and planting design did not. The treatments did not have discernible effects on machine fuel consumption (mean 83 L h–1; σ 16.4) or crop-specific fuel consumption for fresh biomass (mean 1.34 L Mg–1; σ 0.31). Crop-specific fuel consumption was positively correlated with engine load, and negatively correlated with standing biomass; this result was statistically significant but negligible ( |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>osti</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_osti_scitechconnect_1722930</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1722930</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-osti_scitechconnect_17229303</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNy0sKwjAUheEgCtbHHoJjA0lTrZkqigsQHJaYpm2k3pTeVHD3RnEBjg4Hvn9EErHLJUsVV2OScLUVTG1kNiUzxDvnIuOZSMh17_xDI64pdto4qKmGknathvA5pUVXA3VQtYMFY6kZAouCmcZ1tNH90-IXOqDN69a72PpY9wsyqXSLdvnbOVmdjpfDmfnoCzQuWNMYD2BNKESepkpy-Rd6A_BYQuc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Biomass, spacing and planting design influence cut-and-chip harvesting in hybrid poplar</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Eisenbies, Mark H. ; Volk, Timothy A. ; Espinoza, Jesus ; Gantz, Carlos ; Himes, Austin ; Posselius, John ; Shuren, Rich ; Stanton, Brian ; Summers, Bruce</creator><creatorcontrib>Eisenbies, Mark H. ; Volk, Timothy A. ; Espinoza, Jesus ; Gantz, Carlos ; Himes, Austin ; Posselius, John ; Shuren, Rich ; Stanton, Brian ; Summers, Bruce ; State Univ. of New York, Syracuse, NY (United States). College of Environmental Science and Forestry</creatorcontrib><description>Hybrid poplar is a woody crop grown for the production of bioenergy, biofuels and bioproducts. Harvesting is often the largest single cost in the production system and the development and optimization of equipment is evolving. Here, the objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of a single-pass, cut-and-chip harvesting operation in commercial plantings that included four cultivars, two spacing treatments, and two coppice planting designs (dedicated, and interplanted with sawtimber). Approximately 15 h of harvesting using a New Holland 9080 forage harvester equipped with a purpose-built coppice header was monitored over four days. Stand biomass ranged between 34 and 78 Mg ha–1 of fresh biomass and effective material capacity (Cm) of the harvester ranged from 10 to 78 Mg h–1 of fresh biomass excluding headland activities. Tree spacing had a significant effect on Cm but cultivar and planting design did not. The treatments did not have discernible effects on machine fuel consumption (mean 83 L h–1; σ 16.4) or crop-specific fuel consumption for fresh biomass (mean 1.34 L Mg–1; σ 0.31). Crop-specific fuel consumption was positively correlated with engine load, and negatively correlated with standing biomass; this result was statistically significant but negligible (<1%) in terms of liters of fuel used for each additional Mg ha–1 of stand biomass for engine loads ranging between 30% and 110%.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0961-9534</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2909</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier</publisher><subject>BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES ; Biomass harvesting ; Effective field capacity ; Effective material capacity ; Fuel consumption ; Hybrid poplar ; Short-rotation woody crops</subject><ispartof>Biomass & bioenergy, 2017-09, Vol.106</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000000283679762 ; 0000000284704771</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1722930$$D View this record in Osti.gov$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Eisenbies, Mark H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volk, Timothy A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Espinoza, Jesus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gantz, Carlos</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Himes, Austin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Posselius, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shuren, Rich</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanton, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Summers, Bruce</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>State Univ. of New York, Syracuse, NY (United States). College of Environmental Science and Forestry</creatorcontrib><title>Biomass, spacing and planting design influence cut-and-chip harvesting in hybrid poplar</title><title>Biomass & bioenergy</title><description>Hybrid poplar is a woody crop grown for the production of bioenergy, biofuels and bioproducts. Harvesting is often the largest single cost in the production system and the development and optimization of equipment is evolving. Here, the objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of a single-pass, cut-and-chip harvesting operation in commercial plantings that included four cultivars, two spacing treatments, and two coppice planting designs (dedicated, and interplanted with sawtimber). Approximately 15 h of harvesting using a New Holland 9080 forage harvester equipped with a purpose-built coppice header was monitored over four days. Stand biomass ranged between 34 and 78 Mg ha–1 of fresh biomass and effective material capacity (Cm) of the harvester ranged from 10 to 78 Mg h–1 of fresh biomass excluding headland activities. Tree spacing had a significant effect on Cm but cultivar and planting design did not. The treatments did not have discernible effects on machine fuel consumption (mean 83 L h–1; σ 16.4) or crop-specific fuel consumption for fresh biomass (mean 1.34 L Mg–1; σ 0.31). Crop-specific fuel consumption was positively correlated with engine load, and negatively correlated with standing biomass; this result was statistically significant but negligible (<1%) in terms of liters of fuel used for each additional Mg ha–1 of stand biomass for engine loads ranging between 30% and 110%.</description><subject>BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES</subject><subject>Biomass harvesting</subject><subject>Effective field capacity</subject><subject>Effective material capacity</subject><subject>Fuel consumption</subject><subject>Hybrid poplar</subject><subject>Short-rotation woody crops</subject><issn>0961-9534</issn><issn>1873-2909</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNy0sKwjAUheEgCtbHHoJjA0lTrZkqigsQHJaYpm2k3pTeVHD3RnEBjg4Hvn9EErHLJUsVV2OScLUVTG1kNiUzxDvnIuOZSMh17_xDI64pdto4qKmGknathvA5pUVXA3VQtYMFY6kZAouCmcZ1tNH90-IXOqDN69a72PpY9wsyqXSLdvnbOVmdjpfDmfnoCzQuWNMYD2BNKESepkpy-Rd6A_BYQuc</recordid><startdate>20170915</startdate><enddate>20170915</enddate><creator>Eisenbies, Mark H.</creator><creator>Volk, Timothy A.</creator><creator>Espinoza, Jesus</creator><creator>Gantz, Carlos</creator><creator>Himes, Austin</creator><creator>Posselius, John</creator><creator>Shuren, Rich</creator><creator>Stanton, Brian</creator><creator>Summers, Bruce</creator><general>Elsevier</general><scope>OIOZB</scope><scope>OTOTI</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000283679762</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000284704771</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20170915</creationdate><title>Biomass, spacing and planting design influence cut-and-chip harvesting in hybrid poplar</title><author>Eisenbies, Mark H. ; Volk, Timothy A. ; Espinoza, Jesus ; Gantz, Carlos ; Himes, Austin ; Posselius, John ; Shuren, Rich ; Stanton, Brian ; Summers, Bruce</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-osti_scitechconnect_17229303</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES</topic><topic>Biomass harvesting</topic><topic>Effective field capacity</topic><topic>Effective material capacity</topic><topic>Fuel consumption</topic><topic>Hybrid poplar</topic><topic>Short-rotation woody crops</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Eisenbies, Mark H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Volk, Timothy A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Espinoza, Jesus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gantz, Carlos</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Himes, Austin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Posselius, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shuren, Rich</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanton, Brian</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Summers, Bruce</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>State Univ. of New York, Syracuse, NY (United States). College of Environmental Science and Forestry</creatorcontrib><collection>OSTI.GOV - Hybrid</collection><collection>OSTI.GOV</collection><jtitle>Biomass & bioenergy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Eisenbies, Mark H.</au><au>Volk, Timothy A.</au><au>Espinoza, Jesus</au><au>Gantz, Carlos</au><au>Himes, Austin</au><au>Posselius, John</au><au>Shuren, Rich</au><au>Stanton, Brian</au><au>Summers, Bruce</au><aucorp>State Univ. of New York, Syracuse, NY (United States). College of Environmental Science and Forestry</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Biomass, spacing and planting design influence cut-and-chip harvesting in hybrid poplar</atitle><jtitle>Biomass & bioenergy</jtitle><date>2017-09-15</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>106</volume><issn>0961-9534</issn><eissn>1873-2909</eissn><abstract>Hybrid poplar is a woody crop grown for the production of bioenergy, biofuels and bioproducts. Harvesting is often the largest single cost in the production system and the development and optimization of equipment is evolving. Here, the objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of a single-pass, cut-and-chip harvesting operation in commercial plantings that included four cultivars, two spacing treatments, and two coppice planting designs (dedicated, and interplanted with sawtimber). Approximately 15 h of harvesting using a New Holland 9080 forage harvester equipped with a purpose-built coppice header was monitored over four days. Stand biomass ranged between 34 and 78 Mg ha–1 of fresh biomass and effective material capacity (Cm) of the harvester ranged from 10 to 78 Mg h–1 of fresh biomass excluding headland activities. Tree spacing had a significant effect on Cm but cultivar and planting design did not. The treatments did not have discernible effects on machine fuel consumption (mean 83 L h–1; σ 16.4) or crop-specific fuel consumption for fresh biomass (mean 1.34 L Mg–1; σ 0.31). Crop-specific fuel consumption was positively correlated with engine load, and negatively correlated with standing biomass; this result was statistically significant but negligible (<1%) in terms of liters of fuel used for each additional Mg ha–1 of stand biomass for engine loads ranging between 30% and 110%.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier</pub><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000283679762</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000000284704771</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0961-9534 |
ispartof | Biomass & bioenergy, 2017-09, Vol.106 |
issn | 0961-9534 1873-2909 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_osti_scitechconnect_1722930 |
source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
subjects | BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES Biomass harvesting Effective field capacity Effective material capacity Fuel consumption Hybrid poplar Short-rotation woody crops |
title | Biomass, spacing and planting design influence cut-and-chip harvesting in hybrid poplar |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T17%3A55%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-osti&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Biomass,%20spacing%20and%20planting%20design%20influence%20cut-and-chip%20harvesting%20in%20hybrid%20poplar&rft.jtitle=Biomass%20&%20bioenergy&rft.au=Eisenbies,%20Mark%20H.&rft.aucorp=State%20Univ.%20of%20New%20York,%20Syracuse,%20NY%20(United%20States).%20College%20of%20Environmental%20Science%20and%20Forestry&rft.date=2017-09-15&rft.volume=106&rft.issn=0961-9534&rft.eissn=1873-2909&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Costi%3E1722930%3C/osti%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |