Multi-purpose crops and creative combinations of valorisation trajectories

the case of Miscanthus x giganteus

Bio-energy Production Europe 19-21/03/2012 Presented by Veerle Van linden
MSc of Viooltje Lebuf (June 2011) Promotors: Prof. dr. ir. Ludwig Lauwers, Dr. ir. Veerle Van linden

Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research

Technology and Food Science Unit www.ilvo.vlaanderen.be Agriculture and Fisheries Policy Area

Why multi-purpose crops?

Multi-purpose crop:
Multi-product crops Multiple land-use

Combination of VTs1, different approach to bio-energy and bio-based products ( unidirectional) Implementation on-farm
1VT

= valorisation trajectory

Research question

How can a farmer in Flanders use his/her crops for multiple purposes, by combining different valorisation trajectories amongst which bio-energy and bio-based products?
Integrating Food Feed - Fuel Fibre functions How can typical crops contribute to the diversification of agricultural activities?

Qualitative
Cultivation technique fiches + generic scheme Critical factors for success (CFS)

Quantitative
Miscanthus as case study Stochasticity+ uncertain parameters Linear programming Combining VTs Feedback CFS

Result
Feasability VT on farm? Positive effect combination? Important CFS?

Qualitative research

Cultivation technique fiches + generic scheme Critical factors for success

Cultivation technique fiches + Generic scheme

First step in research:
line up different VT of crops in Flanders in a comprehensive way look for similarities between different crops Create a Generick scheme
Innovative use of existing crops Assess the potential use of new (newly introduced) crops

Organic matter

Water

Plant protection

Energy

CROP

Starch, sugar, oil containing component

Vegetative, nonlignified component

Vegetative, lignified component

Bio-based products: green chemistry Food industry Feed industry Bio-energy Feed industry Bio-energy Bio-energy Bio-based materials: construction, paper, textile...

Residue Fermented / direct

Residue

Residue

Critical factors for success (CFS)

In general: logistics, cultivation technique related, ecological Specific: co-fermentation, combustion, feed Importance of factors varies CFS can become less restrictive with improved technology

Quantitative research
Miscanthus as case study General method

Results for contract production

Results for combustion Results for a combination of trajectories

Miscanthus x giganteus
C4-grass, East-Asian origin Sterile hybrid, grown by rhizomes 15-20 years on field yearly yield (from 2nd year) in spring time

10

Methodology quantitative research

1. Variable production stochasticity, 2. Uncertain parameters assumptions 3. Production theoretical optimisation1 without opportunity costs 4. With opportunity costs : linear programming with data from representative farms+ uncertainties via sensitivity analyses 5. Identification of CFS by. sensitivity analyses
1cultivation

costs versus return on farm. The loss of benefits due to the replacement of other crops by Misc. is not taken into account.

11

Results for contract production: fibre board industry (VT1)

Contract shortage (fines) and excess production (lower price)
Equilibrium price within contract (/kg DS)
B
0.072 0.07 0.068 0.066 0.064 0.062 0.06 0.058 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.166

Loamy soil

Sandy soil

0.168

0.164
0.162 0.16 0.158 0.156 0.154

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.1

0.12

Fine (/kg DS) Excess production price(/kg DS): -0,05 0 0,025 0,05 0,075 0,1
12

CFSs for VT1

Cost of rhizomes
B Equilibrium price within contract
Loamy soil
0.076 0.074

Yield
B Equilibrium price within contract
Loamy soil
0.068

0.066

(/kg DS)

0.072 0.07 0.068 0.066 0.064 0 0.05 0.1 0.15

(/kg DS)

0.064

0.062

0.06

0.058
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12

Fine (/kg DS)

Fine e (/kg DS)

Cost rhizomes (/piece):

0,35

0,25

0,15

Yield

Yield+10%

13

Results for valorisation without contract: combustion (VT2)

Different from VT1: fine & excess production Cost for storage ( 3/ton DM) Investment biomass burner (40 000) Pice: savings on fuel (0,39425/L) Only feasible in loamy soils

14

CFSs for VT2

Cost for storage
Storage cost 3/ton DS 10/ton DS 20/ton DS 30/ton DS Cultivated area loamy soil (ha) 4,58 4,58 4,58 0

Investment biomass burner

Investment
3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Cost burner
11806 18750 25694 32639 39583

Area clay soils (ha)

4,01 4,01 4,01 4,01 0

Area sandy-loamy soils (ha) 4,95

4,95 4,95 4,95 0

Area sandy soils (ha) 0

0 0 0 0

15

CFSs for VT2

Stookolieprijs Fuel price (/l) Value of 1 ton DM of Miscanthus (springtime) () 0,1738 0,2173 0,2607 0,3042

Fuel price
Area on clay soils (ha) 0 4,14 4,14 4,14 Area on sandy loam soil (ha) 0 4,95 5,13 5,13 Area on sandy soil (ha) 0 0 6,63 7,00

0,40 0,50 0,60 0,70

16

Results combination of trajectories (VT1 + VT2)

Equilibrium price contract production Equilibrium price is more stable, insensitive to variations in fine Farmer does not depend on industry for valorisation of excess production
0.18 Equilibrium Price within contract (/kg DM) 0.16 0.14 0.12 0.1 0.08 0.06 0.04 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 Fine for shortage (/kg DMS) 17 Polders Leemstreek Zandleemstreek

Zandstreek

General conslusions
First step = systematic representation of data = QUALITATIVE whiche VTs are possible, which crop components are valuable, what are CFS? Second step= QUANTITATIVE stochasticity Uncertain basis data Miscanthus uncertain numbers graphs Fact: trends in graphs & influence of CFS Combining contract production with on-farm valorisation increases independency and competitively of farmer Research of different combinations is possible: fermentation, pelletisation of chips, use in stables as bedding material,...
18

thank you for your attention!

Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research

Technology and Food Science Unit www.ilvo.vlaanderen.be Agriculture and Fisheries Policy Area