1. High Tonnage Forest Biomass Production Systems from Southern Pine Energy Plantations April 8, 2011 Feedstocks Platform Steve Taylor Auburn University This presentation does not contain any proprietary, confidential, or otherwise restricted information

2. Goal Statement Project Goal: Design and demonstrate a high productivity system to harvest, process, and transport woody biomass from southern pine plantations. Biomass Program Goal: Develop sustainable technologies to provide a secure, reliable and affordable biomass feedstock supply for the U.S. bioenergy industry in partnership with USDA and other key stakeholders. 2

3. 3 Quad Chart Overview Project start date – Sept. 2009 Project end date – Sept. 2012 33% complete Barriers addressed –Ft-D. Sustainable Harvesting. –Ft-H. Biomass Storage Systems –Ft-L. Biomass Material Handling and Transportation Total project funding –DOE - $4.99 million –Contractor - $5.00 million FY09 - $0 FY10 - $4.24 million No ARRA Funding Timeline Budget Barriers Auburn University USDA Forest Service Corley Land Services Tigercat Precision Husky Barnes Enterprises Coskata Genera Partners

4. Project Overview Objectives 1.Develop design improvements in tree-length harvesting machines (feller bunchers and skidders) for energy plantations; 2.Configure and assemble a high-productivity, lowest- cost harvesting and transportation system for biomass from southern pine energy plantations; 3.Demonstrate at full industrial scale and document performance of the harvesting, storage, pre- processing, and transportation system to provide the lowest delivered cost and optimal product quality for woody biomass. 4

5. 5 1 - Approach Phase 1 – Research and Development –Benchmark current tree-length harvesting systems –Design new feller buncher and skidder –Design high-capacity trailers –Develop geospatial management tools –Begin to understand industry and landowner concerns Stage-gate Review Phase 2 – Commercial-Scale Demonstration –Quantify industry and landowner acceptance –Test new feller buncher and skidder –Test chipping and debarking machines –Test trailers and trucking logistics –Demonstrate geospatial tools –Test transpirational drying –Explore techniques to maximize feedstock quality –Test extended work schedules –Quantify environmental impacts

6. 6 2 - Technical Accomplishments/ Progress/Results Benchmarking cost and productivity of existing tree-length harvesting systems for southern pine Design of new feller buncher and skidder Design of new trailers Design of geospatial management tools Understanding industry and landowner concerns

7. 7 Benchmarking current harvesting and transportation systems Determine costs and performance of current biomass harvesting system in southern pine plantations –Thinning and clearcuts in young pine plantation stands –~ 20,000 tons over 6 months –Drive-to-tree feller bunchers with sawheads –Grapple skidders –Loader and whole tree chipper –Chip trailers Standard machine rate methodology, observed utilization rates Gross time study (time logs, production records, activity recorder data)

8. BENCHMARKING COST EXAMPLES Utilization 65% Feller buncher 59% Skidder 50% Loader 59% Chipper

9. 9 Benchmarking current harvesting and transportation systems Perturbations drive major variations in cost System components underutilized Felling cost $3.50 to $5.25 per green ton –Accumulation is key to lowering cost Skidding cost $2.50 to $4.25 per green ton Chipping and loading cost $2.50 to $5.00 per green ton Trucking cost s vary widely Productivity equations show potential to reduce costs through the supply chain

10. 10 Design of new harvesting system Tracked feller buncher –High productivity –Low site impact –High speed, low cost shear felling head Transpirational drying of wood Wheeled skidder –High capacity grapple Loader and disk chipper High capacity trailers

11. Harvesting system design Design activities –System design Based on models of predicted machine and system productivity / cost –Mechanical design Standard engineering design and analysis to meet functional requirements and productivity goals

12. Harvesting system design Model developed to predict productivity of the tracked feller buncher – wheeled skidder system –Productivity models for felling and skidding functions –Machine rate methods used for cost calculations –Overall system productivity / cost prediction

13. Harvesting system design Model results target average system productivity >70 green tons/PMH Predicted (theoretical minimum) costs for felling and skidding <$4.00 per green ton –$2.00 /ton felling –$1.60/ton skidding

14. 14 Feller Buncher Design Tigercat 845 D tracked feller buncher –EPA Tier 4i compliant engine –High speed, low cost shear felling head –Energy recovery system for swing mechanism –ER boom system provides energy recovery and planar motion

15. DT1802 Biomass Harvesting High Speed Shear 1.5 seconds to open or close shear

16. Wheeled Skidder Design Tigercat 635 D wheeled skidder –25 sq. ft. grapple –98 tree capacity at 6 in. tree diameter

18. 18 Trailer Design Harvesting system will test transpirational drying of wood –Trees allowed to dry in field for up to 6 weeks to reduce moisture content to as low as 30% High capacity trailers designed to transport greater volume of wood (at lower moisture content) –Designs up to 119 cu. ft. –Volume increases up to 30%

19. 19 Geospatial Management Tools Improved system management is key to meeting cost goals Feller buncher systems to monitor productivity –Tree diameter and position sensors developed to quantify biomass yield –Machine performance (fuel consumption, etc.) supplied by onboard CAN bus Skidder productivity monitoring systems use GPS and CAN bus

20. 20 Feedstock Quality Scientific advisory board and liquid fuel partners emphasized the importance of understanding harvesting system effects on feedstock quality Feedstock data collected from: –Standing trees –Trees harvested with feller buncher and skidder

21. Standing tree baseline Energy (BTU/lb) Carbon (%)Ash (%) Alkali (% of ash) Silica (% of ash) Foliage8195 a 49.52 a 2.59 a 92.71 a 0.49 a Limbs7773 a 48.65 b 1.38 b 94.10 a,b 0.18 b Stem without Bark8111 a 48.18 b 0.40 c 97.93 c 0.06 b Bark8029 a 51.64 d 1.37 b 80.61 d 0.26 b Stem without Bark8714 x 49.71 x 0.38 x 94.04 x 0.00 x Bark 9131 y 52.76 y 1.30 y 89.14 y 0.18 y Auburn site Data from standing trees (loblolly pine) Corley benchmark sites

22. ASH COMPOSITION Al (%) Ca (%) K (%) Mg (% ) Silica (%) Foliage5.6920.4456.768.250.49 Limbs4.7141.5734.9912.810.18 Stem without Bark1.5241.9234.5715.140.06 Bark17.7062.2311.354.740.26 Stem without Bark0.0041.0636.2714.950.00 Bark 8.7267.9612.615.670.18 Auburn site Data from standing trees (loblolly pine) Corley benchmark sites % data are % of ash

23. Handling effects on quality Energy (BTU/lb) Ash (%) Carbon (%) Whole tree Not skidded8715 a 0.84 a 49.92 a Delimbed tree Not skidded8702 a 0.72 a 50.16 a Whole tree skidded8566 b 2.85 b 50.09 a Data from chipped trees

24. Stored feedstock quality Energy (BTU/lb) Ash (%) Alkali (% of ash)Carbon (%) Pile 1 (whole tree chips)8240 a 6.18 a 97.96 a 47.00 a Pile 2 (clean chips)8622 b 1.66 b 95.70 b 49.49 b Data from pile studies (collaborating with INL)

25. 25 Industry and Landowner Perceptions Focus groups conducted to determine issues with bioenergy harvests for landowners and loggers –4 groups each –82 landowners –25 loggers

26. Landowner Bioenergy Concerns My decision to produce and sell trees for conversion to energy… - The “right” price 1.3 - A steady market 1.6 - The environmental impacts of intensive forest management 2.6 - The benefit to the local economy 2.7 - A sense that I am addressing a larger problem 2.9 - Long term contracts with buyers 3.1 - Enrollment in BCAP 3.6 Short rotation forest management practiced on some of my property will likely fit with my objectives to: - provide income 1.9 - protect soil and water resources 3.0 - protect the visual appearance of my property 3.1 - provide wildlife habitat 3.2 -enhance my personal enjoyment 3.5 Average data shown 1 = Very Important 7 = Not Important

27. Logger Bioenergy Concerns My decision to invest in equipment for harvesting biomass could be determined by: - Profitability 1.9 - Long term contracts with buyers 2.0 - A steady market 2.0 - The “right” price 2.1 - The benefit to the local economy 2.8 - A sense that I am addressing a larger problem 3.1 Current barriers to investing in equipment for harvesting biomass are: - Markets for biomass 2.0 - Availability of long term contracts 2.3 - Source of timber for biomass 2.4 - Adoption of new technology 2.6 -Access to financing 2.7 -Availability of trucking (contractors or drivers) 2.8 - Labor availability 2.8 Average data shown 1 = Strongly Agree 7 = Strongly Disagree

28. 28 3 - Relevance The project is developing high-productivity, low-cost harvesting and transportation systems for woody biomass –Southern pine plantations have the potential to supply 100 million dry tons/year –New machines and systems designed for southern pine plantations are intended to reduce harvest and transport cost to meet the woody biomass cost targets set in MYPP –New systems and operating techniques are intended to provide optimal feedstock quality to meet MYPP feedstock goals –Machines are designed to meet future market demands for woody biomass harvesting systems –Landowner and logger feedback will be used to develop system improvements that will encourage adoption of the final machines and systems

29. 29 4 - Critical Success Factors Critical success factors: –Harvest and transport costs to meet MYPP goals ($35 per dry ton) –Feedstock quality to meet biorefinery specifications (e.g. ash content, ash composition, moisture content) –Landowner and logger acceptance of the new systems Potential challenges: –Achieving predicted harvest costs –Successfully implementing transpirational drying –Achieving significant reductions in transportation costs –Gaining landowner and logger acceptance Successful project will result in logistics systems that will provide low-cost, high-quality woody biomass feedstocks

30. 30 Future Work Build and deploy new feller buncher and skidder in industrial-scale tests Test transpirational drying Continue testing feedstock quality and determine relationship between harvest and handling techniques and feedstock quality Build and deploy new high-capacity trailers Test new geospatial management tools and sensors Test extended work schedules Continue focus groups for landowners and loggers

31. 31 Summary Southern pine plantations have the ability to provide 100 million dry tons/year for bioenergy markets. New harvest and transport machines and systems are needed to meet MYPP cost targets. A high-productivity, low-cost harvest system has been designed and is ready for industrial-scale field tests –Tracked feller buncher with high-speed shear head –High-capacity grapple skidder –Transpirational drying –High-capacity in-woods chipping –High-capacity chip trailers –Advanced geospatial and logistics management tools

32. 32 Additional Slides

33. 33 Publications and Presentations Taylor, S.E., R.B. Rummer, F.W. Corley. 2011. High Tonnage Harvesting and Transportation Systems for Southern Pine Biomass. Oral Presentation at Agricultural Equipment Technology Conference. Atlanta, GA. January, 2011.