Layout SRC economy. Prices of different crops in the coming calculations. Production costs and profitability

Similar documents
Economic aspects of willow growing in Sweden

Optimizing lignocellulosic cropping systems to achieve multiple benefits

but only if SRC value improves! SRC Environmental issues and multifunctional uses of SRC Additional values?

Impact of Energy Crops, Logist EC, Brussels, 2 Dec Integration of environmental criteria Annika Henriksson

Case studies on Positive Bioenergy and Water Relationships

Full scale implementation of short rotation willow coppice, SRC, in Sweden

Bioextraction in Practice: a Case Study for Shellfish Cultivation Experiences from Sweden

We are greening the energy!

All farmers subject to greening. Crop Diversification Permanent grassland Ecological focus area (EFA)

Grass and grass-legume biomass as biogas substrate

Adoption dynamics in bioenergy: innovations in bioeconomy

Working Group 1. Biomass availability and supply

Agriculture related bio-energy production in Wales

RELU-Biomass. Social, economic and environmental implications of increasing rural land use under energy crops Angela Karp

Canadian Clean Power Coalition: Delivering Results for Over a Decade

Integrated science for our changing world Energy crops: implications for the UK's groundwater resources. Jon Finch

Study of the economics and development potential of SRWC

Potential of Short Rotation Forest and Short Rotation Coppice as additional resource for biomass production in Latvia

Farm Energy IQ. Bioenergy Feedstock Production for Agricultural Producers. Corn. Objectives. Corn Cobs. Production Costs 2/16/2015

Agricultural Biomass Availability for Bioenergy Applications in Nova Scotia. Michael Main NSAC May 22, 2008

Energy yield and economic value of energy crops for vehicle fuel production ~ Why is the biogas system worse off than other systems?

CROPS COSTS AND RETURNS 2018

Cereals straw and agricultural residues for energy production in Latvia

AARHUS UNIVERSITY. Food production and bioenergy, land allocation, land use with less environmental impact. Professor Jørgen E.

Potential of biomass for energy production, the perspective of biomass in Europe

Bioenergy Policy and Agricultural Development

Options for integrating principles & criteria of sustainable bioenergy production and use into policy

Declaring EFA: learning from a virtual case

Manures use for energy and disposal regulations

Bioenergy yield from cultivated land in Denmark competition between food, bioenergy and fossil fuels under physical and environmental constraints

Land Use Competition for Food, Feed, Fuel and Fibre production

Ecosystem services from dairy farms

AN ALTERNATIVE APPROACH TO NITROGEN MANAGEMENT WITHIN SEWAGE TREATMENT WORKS

Can the production of non food crops be economically viable?

Short rotation coppice strips integrated with site-typical crop rotation

THE COUNTRY REPORT OF SWEDEN

Lowland cattle and sheep farms, under 100 hectares

Information on LULUCF actions by Sweden. First progress report

Liquid Biofuels for Transport

SDA cattle and sheep farms, 120 hectares and over

Analysis of Bioenergy Potential of Agriculture

An ETI Perspective. Bioenergy crops in the UK. Case studies of successful whole farm integration

Draft Commission Delegated Reg. amending delegated Reg. 639/2014 on rules for direct payments to farmers (incl. greening)

Czech Republic, Crop Research Institute, Division of Agroecology. Dr. Sergej Usťak: Biomass as a renewable source of energy in the Czech Republic

FINNISH PERSPECTIVE ON BIOENERGY. Juha Rautanen. 25.October 2007 Copenhagen. Motiva Oy

GREENING IN LATVIA. GAEC Workshop, Riga September 1

Multifunctional production of biomass for the bio-based economy. Erik Steen Jensen Biosystems and Technology LTJ Faculty

The Kindersley Centre, Berkshire November 29 th & 30 th 2006

Comparison between Annual and Perennial Energy Crops

Sustainability assessment: Ukrainian Case Study

Modelling soil organic carbon changes

Increasing the share of domestic grain legumes in human diets benefits for cropping and food system sustainability

CHAPTER 2 BIOMASS SOURCES

EUROPEAN POLICIES TO PROMOTE ENERGY CROPS

Sustainable Pasture Management Practices in Tajikistan

Dedicated Hybrid Poplar Plantations as a Critical Component of the Supply Chain of Pacific Northwest Refineries

Growing Crops for Biofuels Has Spillover Effects

Regional biomass supply chains in Ukraine

ANNEXES. to the COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) /...

Sustainable forest biomass resources for biofuel production in Latvia

Spatial location of EFAs on the farm: searching for a compromise between environmental benefits and economic impact

Lignocellulosic Crops in Agricultural Landscapes

RHI Sustainability - Non Woody Biomass

Using Soil Tests for Soil Fertility Management

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research and

Short Rotation Coppice and Pellet Production on the North Shore. Harnessing Biomass II: Support for Northern Ontario Bioeconomy Initiatives

PROSPECTS FOR THE USE OF AGRICULTURAL RESIDUES FOR ENERGY PRODUCTION IN UKRAINE

Produce Multiple Benefits

Development of the bioenergy sector

Impact of crop rotation with legumes on nutrient loads and GHG emissions

A new policy framework for a more sustainable EU agriculture. Pierre Bascou DG Agriculture and rural development European commission

Use of energy crops for phytoremediation purposes

Can we design an ideal energy crop? Plant breeding research bridging ecology, eco-physiology and genetics

Short rotation coppice as riparian buffer strips. Dr. Cornelia Fürstenau, Manuela Bärwolff

Measurements of tree height using lidar and gas fluxes by chamber methods. Scientific Report. Short Term Scientific Mission (STSM): COST Action FP1301

Agricultural humus management using high quality composts

WP1 WP2 WP3 WP Stimulating sustainable production, collection and preparation of biomass. Conversion and utilisation of biomass to energy

Organic Farming as a GHG Emission Mitigation Possibility in Latvia

Soil Management Strategies to Mitigate Climate Change. Synergies and Tradeoffs with Water Resource Management and Energy Security

European agriculture faces numerous challenges

BIOENERGY PRODUCTION IN RURAL AREAS. Production and utilization of energy from biomass in European marginal rural areas

Economic Modeling of Hungarian Farms Incorporating Nature Conservation. Svetlana Acs, Paul Berentsen, Katalin Takacs-Gyorgy, Ruud Huirne

GCE Environmental Technology. Energy from Biomass. For first teaching from September 2013 For first award in Summer 2014

Project: Information Session

AgroParisTech, Paris cedex 05, France 2. Canadian Wood Fibre Centre, NRCan. 3. SUNY, Syracuse

Adding value to digestate: landscaping, regeneration and horticultural sector trials.

ICLRD Briefing Paper Series. No 10 September 2012 Biomass Resources in the Island of Ireland. Michael Doran

Aus dem Institut für Betriebswirtschaft, Agrarstruktur und ländliche Räume

European Climate Change Programme (ECCP) Working Group on Sinks Related to Agricultural Soils

The green biorefinery seen from the organic farmers perspectives

LOCAL PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE BIOENERGY PRODUCTION: APPROACHES AND APPLICATIONS

CASE STUDY EVIDENCE DAVID HADFIELD FOR HORTICULTURE NEW ZEALAND 29 AUGUST 2014

Willow Biomass Production, Potential and Benefits

Carbon Sequestration in European Agricultural Soils by Potential, Uncertainties, Policy Impacts

Zero-discharge of nutrients and water in a willow dominated constructed wetland

Draft Commission Delegated Reg. amending delegated Reg. 639/2014 on rules for direct payments to farmers (incl. greening)

FINAL DRAFT DOCUMENT FOR COMMENTS

Assessing the role of agri-environmental measures to enhance the environment in the Veneto Region with a model based-approach

VALUATION OF PUBLIC GOODS AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES PROVIDED BY AGRICULTURE

Natura 2000: Benefits and Opportunities for Farmers. Małgorzata Siuta, CEEweb for Biodiversity and Olivia Lewis

Transcription:

Layout SRC economy Production costs and profitability Risk and risk reduction Håkan Rosenqvist (presented by Ioannis Dimitriou) SLU Sludge and wastewater in SRC Own calculations (from own farm) Prices of different crops in the coming calculations Production costs and profitability Crop 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Willow, kr/ton DM 792 858 924 858 836 Reed canary grass, 747 813 879 906 882 kr/ton DM Hemp, kr/ton DM 747 813 879 906 882 Wheat (for bread) 1000 1700 1720 1900 1650 kr/ton Wheat (spring), 1400 1800 1900 1950 1700 kr/ton Barley (fodder), 900 1350 1550 1750 1350 kr/ton Rapeseed, kr/ton 2600 3200 4000 4000 3250 1

Yield for the different crops used in the calculations Crop Low Low-middle Middlehigh High Willow (fertilised) 4,5 6,0 7,5 9,0 Willow (sludge) 4,5 6,0 7,5 9,0 Willow (cutting cycle) 4,5 6,0 7,5 9,0 Reed canary grass 4,5 5,5 6,8 8,2 Hemp 4,5 5,7 7,0 8,5 Wheat (bread) 4,2 5,5 6,8 8,3 Wheat (spring) 3,5 4,5 5,5 7,0 Barley (feed) 3,0 4,2 5,4 6,9 Rapeseed 1,5 2,3 3,3 4,0 Costs and income included in the following calculations All costs except the costs for land are included, e.g. OH, depreciation, interest rates och own work No subsidies are included, except the 5000 t SEK establishment cost subsidy for willow SRC Basic Payment Scheme and greening CAP subsidies are not included in the calculations Crop Production costs (kr/mwh) Low Low-middle Middlehigh High Willow (fertilised) 235 207 190 178 Willow (sludge) 216 192 177 167 Willow (cutting cycle) 173 161 153 148 RCG 279 263 249 239 Hemp 436 390 358 333 Wheat (bread) 447 379 336 304 Wheat 556 467 410 356 Barley (fodder) 645 494 410 346 Rapeseed 716 506 386 338 Straw 161 161 161 161 Gross margins (kr/ha/yr) in 2011 Crop Low Low-middle Middlehigh High Willow (fertilised) -380 145 670 1195 Willow (sludge) -73 476 1024 1573 Willow (cutting cycle) 634 1230 1825 2421 RCG -1836-1920 -2028-2145 Hemp -5767-6018 -6290-6603 Wheat (bread) -160 1274 2645 4148 Wheat (spring) -876 375 1623 3486 Barley (fodder) -2593-1323 -59 1513 Rapeseed -1054 1613 4947 7270 2

Gross margins (kr/ha/yr) in 2013 Crop Low Low-middle Middlehigh High Willow (fertilised) -731-362 8 377 Willow (sludge) -428-36 356 748 Willow (cutting cycle) 311 727 1143 1559 RCG -1787-1832 -1891-1954 Hemp -5643-5863 -6100-6375 Wheat (bread) -344 1014 2372 3939 Wheat -1582-485 613 2259 Barley (fodder) -3442-2362 -1282 68 Rapeseed -2108-87 2438 4206 Cost division in SRC (in SEK) Willow SRC, production period 22 yr, fertilised only after, new clones Average (22 yr) = 8,78 Establishment 784 11% Fertilisation 959 13% Harvest and field transport 2434 33% Tranport to DHP 1405 19% Selling costs 351 5% Termination 91 1% Management and OH costs 710 10% Interest rate 674 9% Sum 7409 100% Things that improve profitability Engagement in the management/cultivation and selling of chips Well-managed crops that result in high yields Geografical localisation Municipal sludge and/or wastewater Collaboration between all parts Source: Swedish Energy Administration, 2014 3

Price development forest residues Yr 2005 137 kr per MWh Yr 2006 146 kr per MWh Yr 2007 158 kr per MWh Yr 2008 167 kr per MWh Yr 2009 181 kr per MWh Yr 2010 197 kr per MWh Yr 2011 214 kr per MWh Yr 2012 205 kr per MWh Yr 2013 199 kr per MWh Yr 2014 194 kr per MWh Active farmers are required when selling the ed chops Prices between the offered by middle-man/companies and end users can vary significantly Investigations of prices from end users, transportation and ers are necessary Comparisons of costs when the, transport och selling of wood material is done by one farmer or a farmer cooperative is necessary before deciding! SRC can be very appropriate for a farming business when: It coincides with the business goals Profitability of existing crops is too low Parts of the farm have low fertility Work inputs are wished to be reduced As alternative to lease the land Examples of business concepts with energy crops as a base Selling heat Dry and sell chips Briketting av various feedstock Take care of sludge or wastewater Feed pigs in SRC Biogas production Business concepts with energy crops 4

Fertilisation of willow SRC Aronsson, P., Rosenqvist, H., Dimitriou, I., 2014. Impact of nitrogen fertilization to short-rotation willow coppice plantations grown in Sweden on yield and economy. Bioenergy Research, 7: 993-1001. Results from fertilisation trials An increase of 59% in yield when new clones were tested (even with low N nitrogen) With a netto value for chips of ca 300 kr per t DM it is profitable to fertilise newer clones With a netto value for chips of ca 500 kr per t DM it is profitable to fertilise non-bred clones Greening of CAP To top up the Basic Payment Scheme, 3 basic measures are foreseen: - maintaining permanent grassland - crop diversification - maintaining an ecological focus area of at least 5% of a farm area which is > 15 ha (excluding permanent grassland) i.e. field margins, hedges, trees, fallow land, landscape features, biotopes, buffer strips, afforested area (this figure will rise to 7% in 2017) - but SRC factor in Sweden is 0.3 and fields must not be fertilised with inorganic N and not using herbicides 5

Gross margins of SRC cultivation Increased biomass (better sorts/clones; better management; better soils etc) Sludge and wastewater application Price Yield level (t DM per hectare) ( /GJ) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2-291 -306-322 -337-352 -368-383 -398 3-226 -228-230 -233-235 -237-239 -242 4-161 -150-139 -128-117 -107-96 -85 5-9 6-72 -48-24 0 24 48 72 6-30 7 44 81 118 154 191 228 7 35 85 135 185 235 285 335 385 Gross margin of SRC (EUR/ha) for a range of yields and wood chip prices (for Swedish conditions in 2009; 1 MWh = 3.6 GJ, 1 t DM = 15.8 GJ). In: Dimitriou and Rosenqvist (Biomass and Bioenergy, 2011) Gross margins of SRC cultivation when sewage sludge is applied Price Yield level (t DM/ha) ( /GJ) 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2-263 -276-288 -301-313 -326-338 -351 3-198 -197-197 -196-196 -195-195 -194 4-133 -119-105 -92-78 -65-51 -37 5-67 -41-14 13 39 66 92 119 6-2 38 77 117 157 196 236 276 7 63 116 169 221 274 327 380 432 Gross margin of SRC (EUR/ha) for a range of yields and wood chip prices (for Swedish conditions in 2009; 1 MWh = 3.6 GJ, 1 t DM = 15.8 GJ) when sewage sludge is applied. In: Dimitriou and Rosenqvist (Biomass and Bioenergy, 2011) Sludge application to SRC Receiving sludge in SRC fields increase the economy of SRC Compensation varies A common increase on farm profitability is ca 500 SEK/ha/yr but there are broader margins if you consider the alternative ways to treat sludge in ww treatment plants 6

Wastewater application 85-90% saving costs for the wastewater treatment plants (per treated kg N) Increased biomass production (fertigation) and saving fertilisation costs (ca 15%) Photo WW 7

Gross margins of SRC cultivation when wastewater is applied Rosenqvist s own willow SRC field Price Yield level (t DM/ha) ( /GJ) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 2-242 -249-256 -264-271 -278-286 -293 3-137 -131-126 -120-114 -109-103 -97 4-33 -14 5 23 42 61 80 98 5 72 103 135 167 199 231 262 294 6 176 221 266 311 355 400 445 490 7 280 338 396 454 512 570 628 686 Gross margin of SRC (EUR/ha) for a range of yields and wood chip prices (for Swedish conditions in 2009; 1 MWh = 3.6 GJ, 1 t DM = 15.8 GJ) when wastewater is irrigated. In: Dimitriou and Rosenqvist (Biomass and Bioenergy, 2011) Agricultural soil, 110 ha Good soil: 85 ha Less good soil: 25 ha Forest: 80 ha Willow SRC: 6 ha Willow on the worst part Planted 1994 Older clones with low production Not fertilised Harvested 3 times Last : January 2009 Harvest in January 2009 Harvest: 16.4 ton DM after 4 years Price per ton DM: 673 kr (150 kr per MWh) Income: 10 985 SEK/ha Harvest costs: 5 079 SEK/ha Transport (65 km): 2 349 SEK/ha Loading: 813 SEK/ha Netto per ha: 2 745 kr/ha Mistakes made Too small turning points for the equipment Two different clones with different yields Too humid at a small part in a small part of the field 8

Kostnader per ton avvattnat slam för svenska reningsverk. Kostnaderna är exkl. spridning TACK! Metod Antal Genomsnittlig Kostnad, SEK Anläggningsjord 68 239 Deponi inkl. skatt 12 657 Förbränning 2 559 Jordbruk 14 226 Salix 9 221 Kostnader avloppsbevattning Investering för bevattning ca 50 000 kr per hektar vid 10 hektars bevattning Driftskostnad ca 50 60 öre per kubikmeter vatten 9