A cost-benefit analysis of pre-sorting using a feller-buncher in underdeveloped short rotation poplar plantations

References

• Bergroth J, Palander T, Kärhä K. 2006. Excavator-based harvesters in wood cutting operations in Finland. For Stud. 45:74–88.
   Google Scholar
• Björheden R, Apel K, Shiba M, Thompson M. 1995. IUFRO Forest work study nomenclature. Garpenberg: Swedish University of Agricultural Science, Dept. of Operational Efficiency; p. 16.
   Google Scholar
• Forsman M, Holmgren J, Olofsson K. 2016. Tree stem diameter estimation from mobile laser scanning using line-wise intensity-based clustering. Forest. 7(206):22.
   Google Scholar
• Gingras JF 1996 The cost of product sorting during harvesting. In: Blinn C, Thompson M. Editors. Proceedings of papers presented at the joint meeting of the council on forest engineering and international union of forest research organizations. USDA FS north central forest experiment station. General technical Report NC186: 130-136.
   Google Scholar
• Gingras JF, Godin A 2001. Producing multiple log products: a systems comparison. No. 10. Forest Engineering Research Institute of Canada, Vancouver (B.C., Canada).
   Google Scholar
• Hartmann KU 2010. Entwicklung eines Ertragsschätzers für Kurzumtriebsbestände aus Pappel. [PhD Thesis], Tharandt (Germany): Technische Universität Dresden, Fakultät Forst-, Geo- und Hydrowissenschaften. 162 p.
   Google Scholar
• Headlee W, Zalesny R 2019 31 August. Allometric relationships for aboveground woody biomass differ among hybrid poplar genomic groups and clones in the North-Central USA. Bioenergy Research. 11 p. Published online. [Accessed 2021 May 28]. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12155-019-10038-1
   Google Scholar
• Heilig D, Heil B, Leibing C, Röhle H, Kovàcs G. 2021. Comparison of the initial growth of different poplar clones on four sites in western Slovakia—preliminary results. Bioenerg Res. 14(2):374–384. doi:10.1007/s12155-020-10227-3.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heilman P. 1999. Planted forests: poplars. New For. 17(1/3):89–93. doi:10.1023/A:1006515204167.
   Google Scholar
• Helby P, Rosenqvist H, Roos A. 2006. Retreat from Salix – Swedish experience with energy crops in the 1990s. Biomass Bioenerg. 30(5):422–427. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2005.12.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hjelm B 2015. Empirical models for estimating volume and biomass of poplars on farmland in Sweden. [PhD Thesis], Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Faculty of Natural Resources and Agricultural Sciences, Dept. of Crop Production and Ecology. Uppsala (Sweden). 61 p.
   Google Scholar
• IPP. 2019. Biomass plantations in Poland. [Accessed 2021 May 08]. http://www.internationalpaper.com/company/regions/europe-middle-east-africa/sustainability/highlights/biomass-plantations-in-poland
   Google Scholar
• Karttunen K, Laitila J, Ranta T. 2016. First-thinning harvesting alternatives for industrial or energy purposes based on regional scots pine stand simulations in Finland. Silva Fennica. 50(2):1521. doi:10.14214/sf.1521.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kärhä K. 2011. Integrated harvesting of energy wood and pulpwood in first thinings using two-pile cutting method. Biomass Bioenerg. 35(18):3397–3403. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.10.029.
   Google Scholar
• Kizha AR, Han HS. 2016. Processing and sorting forest residues: cost, productivity and managerial impacts. Biomass Bioenerg. 93:97–106. doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2016.06.021.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Košir B, Magagnotti N, Spinelli R. 2015. The role of work studies in forest engineering: status and perspectives. Int J For Eng. 26:160–170.
   Google Scholar
• Krejza J, Světlìk J, Bednář P. 2017. Allometric relationship and biomass expansion factors (BEFs) for above- and below-ground biomass prediction and stem volume estimation for ash (Fraxinus excelsior L.) and oak (Quercus robur L.). Trees. 31(4):1303–1316. doi:10.1007/s00468-017-1549-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lahrsen S, Mologni O, Magalhães J, Grigolato S, Röser D. 2021. Key factors influencing productivity of whole-tree ground-based felling equipment commonly used in the Pacific Northwest. Can J For Res. 52(4):450–462. doi:10.1139/cjfr-2021-0266.
   Google Scholar
• Landgraf D, Carl C, Nuepert M. 2020. Biomass yield of 37 different SRC poplar varieties grown on a typical site in North Eastern Germany. Forest. 11:1048. doi:10.3390/f11101048
   Google Scholar
• Leonello EC, Gonçalves SP, Fenner PT. 2012. Efeito do tempo de experiência de operadores de harvester no rendimento operacional. Revista Árvore. 36(6):1129–1133. doi:10.1590/S0100-67622012000600013.
   Google Scholar
• Magagnotti N, Kanzian C, Schulmeyer F, Spinelli R. 2011. A new guide for work studies in forestry. Int J For Eng. 24:249–253.
   Google Scholar
• Magagnotti N, Spinelli R, Kärhä K, Mederski P. 2021. Multi-tree cut-to-length harvesting of short-rotation poplar plantations. Eur J Forest Res. 140(2):345–354. doi:10.1007/s10342-020-01335-y.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manner J, Nordfjell T, Lindroos O. 2013. Effects of the number of assortments and log concentration on time consumption for forwarding. Silva Fennica. 47(4):1–19. doi:10.14214/sf.1030.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMorland B. 2008. Productivity data from western Canada: bunchers III. Vancouver (B.C., Canada): PR-12. FPInnovations–FERIC.
   Google Scholar
• Meek P. 1995. Preliminary evaluation of the ET-1 Processor. Quebec (Canada): Field Note No.: Processing-43. FERIC, Pointe Claire; p. 2.
   Google Scholar
• Meyer M, Morgenstern K, Heilig D, Heil B, Kovács G, Leibing C, Krabel D. 2021. Biomass allocation and root characteristics of early-stage poplars (populus spp.) for assessing their water-deficit response during SRC establishment. Bioenerg Res. 14(2):385–398. doi: 10.1007/s12155-021-10264-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mikkonen E. 1976. Sorting with a feller-buncher. Tiedonantoja, Helsingin Yliopiston Metsateknologian Laitos. 32:32.
   Google Scholar
• Pasanen K, Laitila J, Pykäläinen J, Anttila P. 2014. Using the ComBio decision support system to assess whether energy wood and/or pulpwood should be harvested in young forests. Int J For Eng. 25(1):51–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/14942119.2014.903614
   Google Scholar
• Purfürst T, Erler J. 2011. The human influence on productivity in harvester operations. Int J For Eng. 22(2):15–22.
   Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Visser R. 2008. Analyzing and estimating delays in harvester operations. Int J For Eng. 19:36–41.
   Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Moura de Arruda AC. 2019. Productivity and utilization benchmarks for chain flail Delimberdebarkers-Chippers used in fast-growing plantations. Croat J For Eng. 40(1):65–80.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Owende P, Ward S. 2002. Productivity and cost of CTL harvesting of Eucalyptus globulus stands using excavator-based harvesters. For Prod J. 52(1):67–77.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Schweier J, De Francesco F. 2013. Harvesting techniques for non-industrial biomass plantations. Biosys Eng. 113(4):319–324. doi:10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2012.09.008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Kovac B, Heger P, Heilig D, Heil B, Kovàcs G, Magagnotti N. 2022a. Manipulating grading strategy for the efficient harvesting of industrial poplar plantations. Int J For Eng. 33:98–107.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Kovác B, Heger P, Heilig D, Heil B, Kovács G, Magagnotti N. 2022b. The effect of target log length on log recovery and harvesting cost: the example of short-rotation poplar plantations. Forest. 13:669. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13050669
   Google Scholar
• Spinelli R, Kovac B, Heger P, Heilig D, Magagnotti N 2022c. First trial of a prototype chain-flail delimber for the European short rotation poplar plantations. Pre-Print posted on Research Square. [Accessed 2022 April 7]. https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-1518173/v1/04d633e7-5ec4-4ec8-bed1-6b8c2901ad3b.pdf?c=1649348581
   Google Scholar
• Stanton B, Eaton J, Johnson J, Rice D, Schuette B, Moser B. 2002. Hybrid poplar in the pacific northwest: the effects of market-driven management. J For. 100:28–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urban J, Čermák J, Ceulemans R. 2015. Above- and below-ground biomass, surface and volume, and stored water in a mature scots pine stand. Eur J For Res. 134(1):61–74. doi:10.1007/s10342-014-0833-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forest Service US. 2022. On-line forest operations equipment catalogue https://www.fs.fed.us/forestmanagement/equipment-catalog/logloaders.shtml
   Google Scholar
• Väätäinen K, Ala-Fossi A, Nuutinen Y, Röser D. 2006. The effect of single grip harvester’s log bunching on forwarder efficiency. Baltic For. 12(1):64–69.
   Google Scholar
• Verlinden MS, Broeckx LS, Van den Bulcke J, Van Acker J, Ceulemans R. 2013. Comparative study of biomass determinants of 12 poplar (Populus) genotypes in a high-density short-rotation culture. For Ecol Manag. 307:101–111. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2013.06.062.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werner C, Haas E, Grote R, Gauder M, Graeff-Höonninger S, Claupein W, Butterbach-Bahl K. 2012. Biomass production potential from populus short rotation systems in Romania. GCB Bioenerg 4: 642-–653. 4(6):642–653. doi:10.1111/j.1757-1707.2012.01180.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang SY, Yu Q, Chauret G, Koubaa A. 2003. Selection for both growth and wood properties in hybrid poplar clones. For Sci. 49:901–908.
   Google Scholar