Feasibility raises hurdles for development of forest biomass

An analysis by economists indicates that the use of residual forest biomass for rural development is unlikely to be a source of jobs in the near future, at least in the United States.

Published in Forest Policy and Economics by economists with the College of Forestry at Oregon State University (OSU), the study is based on an evaluation of costs for collecting, transporting and processing biomass with the potential locations of regional processing facilities in western Oregon, a state in the U.S. Pacific Northwest.

The focus of the study was biomass generated during timber harvesting operations, which consists of branches and treetops that are generally left in the woods or burned.

"There's a lot of interest in focusing on the use of biomass to meet multiple objectives, one of which is support for rural communities," explained Mindy Crandall, who led the research as a doctoral student at OSU and is now an assistant professor at the University of Maine. "We thought this might provide some support for that idea."

In what may be the first study to combine a model of biomass operations with specific locations for regional processing facilities where the material could be processed and stored, the researchers identified 65 likely locations in western Oregon for such facilities, which they call "depots." The cost of harvesting, chipping and loading biomass at timber harvesting sites comes to about 37.50 U.S. dollars per dry ton, operating costs of a regional depot, including labor, fuel, maintenance, electricity and supplies, would add another 11 dollars per dry ton, and these estimates do not include transportation and depot construction.

"The actual levels of these costs that operators experience will be really critical to feasibility," Crandall was quoted as saying by a news release from OSU on Wednesday. She and colleagues estimated that a depot operating three shifts per day and producing 75,000 dry tons per year would create about 19 jobs.

The potential for biomass, the researchers said, will likely depend on the ability to achieve other aims in addition to generating biomass as a product: wildfire risk reduction, forest restoration, energy and rural economic stimulus. And it will take changes in technology from transportation to processing as well as the development of new value-added products, such as aviation fuel and industrial chemicals, to improve the economic feasibility of biomass.

John Sessions, an OSU professor of forestry who did not take part in this analysis, has studied the use of forest harvest residues to produce aviation fuel in a project led by Washington State University. While it is technically possible, the economic feasibility of making aviation fuel from biomass would depend on generating income from co-products, said Sessions. And the first commercial airline flight using aviation fuel made from forest harvest residues in the project was flown by Alaska Airlines last month from Seattle to Washington, D.C. Endit