Wood biomass recovery cost under different harvesting methods and market conditions

References

• Adebayo AB, Han H-S, Johnson L. 2007. Productivity and cost of cut-to-length and whole-tree harvesting in a mixed-conifer stand. For Prod J. 57(6):59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Avery TE, Burkhart HE. 1983. Forest measurements. 3rd ed. New York (USA): McGraw-Hill Book Company.
   Google Scholar
• Barrett SM, Bolding MC, Aust WM, Munsell JF. 2014. Characteristics of logging businesses that harvest biomass for energy production. For Prod J. 64(7–8):265–272.
   Google Scholar
• Bataineh MM, Wagner RG, Weiskittel AR. 2013. Long-term response of spruce–fir stands to herbicide and precommercial thinning: observed and projected growth, yield, and financial returns in central Maine, USA. Can J For Res. 43(999):385–395. doi:10.1139/cjfr-2012-0343.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Becker DR, Larson D, Lowell EC. 2009. Financial considerations of policy options to enhance biomass utilization for reducing wildfire hazards. For Policy Econ. 11(8):628–635. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2009.08.007.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benjamin JG, Seymour RS, Meacham E, Wilson J. 2013. Impact of whole-tree and cut-to-length harvesting on postharvest condition and logging costs for early commercial thinning in Maine. North J Appl For. 30(4):149–155. doi:10.5849/njaf.13-016.
   Google Scholar
• Bolding MC, Kellogg LD, Davis CT. 2009. Productivity and costs of an integrated mechanical forest fuel reduction operation in southwest Oregon. For Prod J. 59(3):12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bouvier R. 2009. Determinants of environmental performance: pulp and paper mills, regulations, and community in Maine. Econ Dev Q. 23(2):111–126. doi:10.1177/0891242408327038.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brinker RW, Kinard J, Rummer R, Lanford B. 2002. Machine rates for selected forest harvesting machines. Circular 296 (revised). Ala Agric Exp Stn Auburn Univ Auburn; Auburn, Alabama, USA. p. 32.
   Google Scholar
• Contreras M, Freitas R, Ribeiro L, Stringer J, Clark C. 2017. Multi-camera surveillance systems for time and motion studies of timber harvesting equipment. Comput Electron Agric. 135:208–215. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2017.02.005.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conversion factors - forest research. [ accessed 2020 Feb 2020]. https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/forestry-statistics/forestry-statistics-2016-introduction/sources/timber/conversion-factors/.
   Google Scholar
• Dixon G, Keyser C. 2008. Northeast (NE) variant overview: forest vegetation simulator. USDA Serv Manage Serv Cent Rep Intern.Fort Collins, Colorado.
   Google Scholar
• DOE U. 2011. US Billion-Ton Update: biomass supply for a bioenergy and bioproducts industry, RD Perlack and BJ Stokes (Leads). Oak Ridge TN: ORNLTM-2011224 Oak Ridge Natl Lab.
   Google Scholar
• FAO. 2018. Global forest products facts and figures-2018. Food Agric Organ U N [Internet]. [ accessed 2019 Jun 8]. http://www.fao.org/3/ca7415en/ca7415en.pdf
   Google Scholar
• FIA U 2014. Forest inventory & analysis - US forest service research & development [Internet]. [ accessed 2020 Jan 30]. https://www.fs.fed.us/research/inventory-monitoring-analysis/forest-inventory-analysis.php
   Google Scholar
• Gan J, Smith CT. 2006. Availability of logging residues and potential for electricity production and carbon displacement in the USA. Biomass Bioenergy. 30(12):1011–1020. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2005.12.013.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• George AK, Kizha AR, Kenefic L. 2019. Economic feasibility of timber harvesting in lowlands. In: Czupy I, editor. Exceed vis for mech future. Sopron (Hungary): University of Sopron Press; p. 379–393.
   Google Scholar
• Germain R, Regula J, Bick S, Zhang L. 2019. Factors impacting logging costs: a case study in the Northeast, US. For Chron. 95(1):16–23. doi:10.5558/tfc2019-005.
   Google Scholar
• Ghaffariyan MR, Spinelli R, Magagnotti N, Brown M. 2015. Integrated harvesting for conventional log and energy wood assortments: a case study in a pine plantation in Western Australia. South For J For Sci. 77(4):249–254. doi:10.2989/20702620.2015.1052946.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glade D. 1999. Single- and double-grip harvesters – productive measurements in final cutting of shelterwood. J For Eng. 10(2):63–74.
   Google Scholar
• Han H, Chung W, She J, Anderson N, Wells L. 2018. Productivity and costs of two beetle-kill salvage harvesting methods in Northern Colorado. Forests. 9(9):572. doi:10.3390/f9090572.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han H-S, Lee HW, Johnson LR. 2004. Economic feasibility of an integrated harvesting system for small-diameter trees in southwest Idaho. For Prod J. 54(2):21–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanzelka NC, Bolding MC, Sullivan J, Barrett SM. 2016. Productivity and costs of utilizing small-diameter stems in a biomass-only harvest. Int J For Eng. 27(1):43–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrill H, Han H-S. 2012. Productivity and cost of integrated harvesting of wood chips and sawlogs in stand conversion operations. Int J For Res. 2012:10.
   Google Scholar
• Hartsough BR, Drews ES, McNeel JF, Durston TA, Storkes BJ. 1997. Comparison of mechanized systems for thinning Ponderosa pine and mixed conifer stands. For Prod J. 47(11/12):59–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiesl P, Benjamin J. 2013. Applicability of international harvesting equipment productivity studies in Maine, USA: a literature review. Forests. 4(4):898–921. doi:10.3390/f4040898.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiesl P, Benjamin JG 2015. Thinning of small diameter stands in Maine. Proc 38th Counc For Eng Eng Solut Non Ind Priv For Oper Lexingt KY USA:10.
   Google Scholar
• Hiesl P, Benjamin JG, Roth BE. 2015. Evaluating harvest costs and profit of commercial thinnings in softwood stands in west-central Maine: a case study. For Chron. 91(2):150–160. doi:10.5558/tfc2015-026.
   Google Scholar
• Honer TG. 1965. A new total cubic foot volume function. For Chron. 41(4):476–493. doi:10.5558/tfc41476-4.
   Google Scholar
• Hudson J, Mitchell C, Storry P. 1990. Costing integrated harvesting systems. Proc IEABA Task 6th Act Integr Harvest Syst. 2:46–52.
   Google Scholar
• Jones G, Loeffler D, Calkin D, Chung W. 2010. Forest treatment residues for thermal energy compared with disposal by onsite burning: emissions and energy return. Biomass Bioenergy. 34(5):737–746. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.01.016.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kizha A, Han HS, Montgomery T, Hohl A, Bisson J. 2015. Determining cost zones and hot spots for procuring feedstock for woody biomass-based power plants in northern California. Calif Agr. 69:184–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kizha AR, Han HS 2015a. Productivity and cost of processing and sorting forest residues. In: 38th Counc For Eng Annu Meet. Lexington, Kentucky; p. 52–67
   Google Scholar
• Kizha AR, Han H-S. 2015. Forest residues recovered from whole-tree timber harvesting operations. Eur J For Eng. 1(2):46–55.
   Google Scholar
• Kizha AR, Han H-S. 2016. Processing and sorting forest residues: cost, productivity and managerial impacts. Biomass Bioenergy. 93:97–106. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.06.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kizha AR, Han H-S, Paulson JS, Koirala A. 2018. Strategies for reducing moisture content in forest residues at the harvest site. Appl Eng Agric. 34(1):25–33. doi:10.13031/aea.12427.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koirala A, Kizha A, De Urioste-Stone S. 2017a. Policy recommendation from stakeholders to improve forest products transportation: a qualitative study. Forests. 8(11):434. doi:10.3390/f8110434.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koirala A, Kizha A, Roth BE. 2017b. Perceiving major problems in forest products transportation by trucks and trailers: a cross-sectional survey. Eur J Eng. 3:23–34.
   Google Scholar
• Labelle ER, Breinig L, Sycheva E. 2018. Exploring the use of harvesters in large-diameter hardwood-dominated stands. Forests. 9(7):424. doi:10.3390/f9070424.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laitila J, Heikkilä J, Anttila P. 2010. Harvesting alternatives, accumulation and procurement cost of small-diameter thinning wood for fuel in Central Finland. Silva Fenn. 44(3):465–480. doi:10.14214/sf.143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lanford BL, Stokes BJ. 1996. Comparison of two thinning systems. Part 2. Productivity and costs. For Prod J. 46(11/12):47.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langholtz MH, Stokes BJ, Eaton LM. 2016. 2016 Billion-ton report: advancing domestic resources for a thriving bioeconomy, volume 1: economic availability of feedstock. Vol. 2016, Oak Ridge Natl Lab Oak Ridge Tenn Manag UT-Battelle LLC US Dep Energy. Oak Ridge, Tennessee. p. 1–411.
   Google Scholar
• Lauri P, Havlík P, Kindermann G, Forsell N, Böttcher H, Obersteiner M. 2014. Woody biomass energy potential in 2050. Energy Policy. 66:19–31. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2013.11.033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li Y, Wang J, Miller G, McNeel J. 2006. Production economics of harvesting small-diameter hardwood stands in central Appalachia. For Prod J. 56(3):81–86.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miyata ES. 1980. Determining fixed and operation costs of logging equipment. St. Paul, Minnesota.
   Google Scholar
• Montgomery TD, Han H-S, Kizha AR. 2016. Modeling work plan logistics for centralized biomass recovery operations in mountainous terrain. Biomass Bioenergy. 85:262–270. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.11.023.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nordfjell T, Öhman E, Lindroos O, Ager B. 2019. The technical development of forwarders in Sweden between 1962 and 2012 and of sales between 1975 and 2017. Int J For Eng. 30(1):1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paulson JS, Kizha AR, Han H-S. 2019. Integrating biomass conversion technologies with recovery operations in-woods: modeling supply chain. Logistics. 3(3):16. doi:10.3390/logistics3030016.
   Google Scholar
• Puttock GD. 1995. Estimating cost for integrated harvesting and related forest management activities. Biomass and Bioenergy . 8(2):73–79.
   Google Scholar
• Routa J, Asikainen A, Björheden R, Laitila J, Röser D. 2013. Forest energy procurement: state of the art in Finland and Sweden. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Energy Environ. 2(6):602–613. doi:10.1002/wene.24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahoo K, Bilek E, Bergman R, Kizha AR, Mani S. 2019. Economic analysis of forest residues supply chain options to produce enhanced‐quality feedstocks. Biofuels Bioprod Biorefining. 13(3):514–534. doi:10.1002/bbb.1958.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simões D, Marcelino FA, Pletsch TA, Faria de LR, Fenner PT. 2008. Technical and economical evaluation of harvester in cut-to-length system in first cut eucalyptus forest. Cent Theme Technol Shar Knowl Dev Proc Int Conf Agric Eng XXXVII Braz Congr Agric Eng Int Livest Environ Symp - ILES VIII Iguassu Falls City Braz 31st August 4th Sept 2008 [Internet]. Iguassu Falls City, Brazil. [ accessed 2019 Aug 12]. https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/20103078563
   Google Scholar
• Soman H. 2019. Productivity, costs, and best management practices for major timber harvesting frameworks in Maine [Electronic Theses and Dissertations] [Internet]. Orono (Maine):The University of Maine. accessed 2019 Aug 12. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/2960.
   Google Scholar
• Soman H, Kizha AR, Muñoz Delgado B, Kenefic LS, Kanoti K. 2020. Production economics: comparing hybrid tree-length with whole-tree harvesting methods. For Int J for Res Cpz. 065.
   Google Scholar
• Soman H, Kizha AR, Roth BE. 2019. Impacts of silvicultural prescriptions and implementation of best management practices on timber harvesting costs. Int J For Eng. 30(1):14–25.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Visser R, Björheden R, Röser D. 2019. Recovering energy biomass in conventional forest operations: a review of integrated harvesting systems. Curr For Rep. 5(2):90–100.
   Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Visser RJM. 2009. Analyzing and estimating delays in wood chipping operations. Biomass Bioenergy. 33(3):429–433. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2008.08.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone IJ, Benjamin JG, Leahy JE. 2011. Innovation impacts on biomass supply in Maine’s logging industry. For Prod J. 61(7):579+.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thiffault E, Béchard A, Paré D, Allen D. 2015. Recovery rate of harvest residues for bioenergy in boreal and temperate forests: A review. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Energy Environ. 4(5):429–451. doi:10.1002/wene.157.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• USDA NRCS. 2013. Web soil survey. Web Soil Surv [Internet]. [ accessed 2019 Jun 10]. https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Venables WN, Ripley BD, Venables WN. 2002. Modern applied statistics with S. 4th ed. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Whalley S, Klein SJ, Benjamin J. 2017. Economic analysis of woody biomass supply chain in Maine. Biomass Bioenergy. 96:38–49. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.10.015.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar