Productivity and Product Quality Measures for Chippers and Grinders on Operational Southern US Timber Harvests
Abstract
Growth in bioenergy interests in the southeastern United States has created a need for cost-effective woody biomass harvesting systems. We evaluated three operational systems for their potential production and cost: horizontal grinders fed with residue from roundwood harvests, horizontal grinders fed with residue from clean chipping harvests, and whole tree chippers fed with entire stems. We evaluated three contractors operating each of the three system types over the course of approximately one working week each. Utilization rates for chippers and grinders were 44% and 38% respectively. Hourly production ranged between 22 – 30 metric green tonnes (gt)/SMH and 64 – 70 gt/PMH and did not differ significantly between the three systems. Delivered costs per gt of material were also very similar for the three systems and ranged between $22.68 and $23.81.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Without the High Hazard Zone feedstock requirement, biomass power facilities would likely be more inclined to purchase feedstock from less costly sources such as sawmill residue or logging residue from more profitable timber harvesting activities on private land.
“Without the High Hazard Zone feedstock requirement, biomass power facilities would likely be more inclined to purchase feedstock from less costly sources, such as sawmill residue or logging residue from more profitable timber harvesting activities on private land [13].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [13]
With the launch of BioRAM and the High Hazard Zone feedstock requirement, the price for delivered biomass fuel sourced from High Hazard Zones and sustainable forest management activities rose to almost $60 per bone dry ton in 2018 on average; prior to BioRAM, the average cost of delivered fuel was $35.95 per bone dry ton.
“With the launch of BioRAM and the High Hazard Zone feedstock requirement, the price for delivered biomass fuel sourced from High Hazard Zones and sustainable forest management activities rose to almost $60/bone dry ton (BDT) in 2018, on average.Prior to BioRAM, the average cost of delivered fuel was $35.95/BDT [13].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [13]
Both the technical literature and on-the-ground experience conclude integrated harvesting to be the most economically attractive option to accomplish thinning of small-diameter trees.
“Both the technical literature and on-the-ground experience conclude integrated harvesting to be the most economically attractive option to accomplish thinning of small-diameter trees [12,13].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [13]
The regional market in California for delivered biomass sourced from High Hazard Zones in 2018 was on average $59/BDT, and that is on the high end relative to markets for biomass material sourced from more profitable timber harvests on private land or from sawmill residues.
“For comparison, the regional market in California for delivered biomass sourced from High Hazard Zones in 2018 was on average $59/BDT, and that is on the high end relative to markets for biomass material sourced from more profitable timber harvests on private land or from sawmill residues [13].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [13]
Even with more favorable prices offered, the delivery of biomass to a biomass power plant seldom pays for itself.
“But even with more favorable prices offered, the delivery of biomass to a biomass power plant seldom pays for itself [13].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [13]
Most biomass delivered to biomass plants from USFS land is produced in conjunction with sawtimber harvests.
“In fact, most biomass delivered to biomass plants from USFS land is produced in conjunction with sawtimber harvests [13].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [13]
The study's haul-cost finding is consistent with the Beck Group's (2019) estimate for haul costs to biomass facility.
“This finding is consistent with the Beck Group's (2019) estimate for haul costs to biomass facility [13].”
From Linking Federal Forest Restoration with Wood Utilization: Modeling Biomass Prices and Analyzing Forest Restoration Costs in the Northern Sierra Nevada (2021) · cites this paper as [13]
Cites
A realizable renewable energy future
Turner, J. A. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.285.5428.687 · Cited by 1,642 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Swezy, C., Bailey, J., & Chung, W. (2021) · Energies · doi:10.3390/en14092696 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
“But even with more favorable prices offered, the delivery of biomass to a biomass power plant seldom pays for itself [13].”
BackgroundResultInfluential
- Authors
- Aman, A. L., Baker, S. A., & Greene, W. D.
- Affiliations
- a International Paper, Fiber Procurement , Selma , AL , 36703 E-mail:
- University of Georgia (US)
- Corresponding author
- Baker, Shawn A.
- ORCID
- Greene, W. Dale
- Venue
- International Journal of Forest Engineering
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2011-06
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 7-14
- ISSN
- 1494-2119 (ISSN-L)
- 1913-2220
- OpenAlex
- W1567902010
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 2.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Journal of Forest Engineering (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Forest Biomass Utilization and Management
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Forestry › Agricultural and Food Sciences
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Agricultural Engineering and Mechanization
- Keywords
- biomass feedstock, whole-tree harvesting, contractor performance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
