Biomass currently provides almost 10 percent of the world&rsquo;s energy supply. Two-thirds of that 10 percent is used for cooking and heating in developing countries, whereas developed countries measure biomass as a replacement for fossil fuels. According to the International Energy Agency&rsquo;s August 2014 Renewable Energy Market Report, global renewable generation will rise by 45 percent and is expected to make up nearly 26 percent of electricity generation by 2020. What does this mean to the future of the pellet industry? Today I offer my top three predictions.
 &bull; Demand for wood pellets for heat will surpass power in all developed nations. In April 2014, Phase II of the United Kingdom&rsquo;s Renewable Heat Incentive came into effect. The Domestic RHI provides seven years of cash payments to families who have converted to wood pellet boilers and other renewable heating systems. Although the nondomestic phase of RHI, launched in 2011, reached a milestone in August&mdash;over a gigawatt of biomass-fired heating systems supported&mdash;the domestic, Phase II adoption was more dramatic. In the first seven weeks, 1,000 installations of renewable energy heating systems were approved. Imagine if 27 European Union members and the rest of the developed nations implement an RHI. In Canada, for example, less than half of the population has access to natural gas. With an RHI-type subsidy, adoption of biomass heating systems could surpass any alternatives. In the U.S., FutureMetrics recently studied 20 northern states and determined that over 4 million households could be regionally and sustainably served by wood pellets. This puts the North American heat market potential at 9.5 million metric tons annually. More than six 500 MW biomass stations would have to be operational to reach that same level. The European Pellet Council predicts 10 million metric tons of demand for the heat market for EU countries, which suggests several countries will meet this prediction. Today, Italy, Denmark, France and Austria have a biomass heat demand that exceeds power. As this increasingly occurs in developed nations around the world, producers should be diversified in terms of pellet type and the geography they serve.
 &bull; Consolidation will replace new pellet builds. Despite the growing demand for biomass in multiple sectors, the advance of new capacity in North America will peak in 2014 and decline over the next five years. According to the Biomass Magazine pellet plant maps, an expected 10 million metric tons of new capacity is planned or under construction in North America today. It is unlikely that all 46 projects will proceed, and this will likely begin a steady decline through 2020.&nbsp; Usually, new investment, particularly when project financing is involved, requires long-term offtake for approval. This means the only demand that will be measured and considered will be the power generators in Europe, as Asian gencos have not demonstrated they will sign long-term offtakes. Instead, current capacity will be aggregated, acquired, and consolidated for greater efficiencies. Approximately 150 plants in the U.S. produce less than 100,000 metric tons per year. Today, with the majority of demand in Europe, most North American shipments occur from six or seven major ports. By acquiring, or at minimum aggregating from multiple inland locations, ocean freight efficiencies and volume redundancy can be achieved by producers.&nbsp; Consolidation also offers investors lower risk and lower cost per ton than a new build.
 &bull; Trading will become a virtual storage alternative. With over 5 million metric tons of transcontinental trade flows, ports such as Rotterdam are experiencing higher pellet volume each year. To manage this flow, some significant pellet storage investments have been made over the past few years&mdash;Savannah, Georgia; Port of Quebec, and Prince Rupert, British Columbia, to name a few. Additionally, several biomass power stations have invested substantially, including Drax in the U.K. and Ontario Power Generation in Atikoken, Canada.&nbsp; Despite the capital expenditure, it is unlikely that major power stations, at full fire, will store more than a few weeks of wood pellet fuel. The onus is on the producers&mdash;or the aggregators&mdash;to manage production fluctuations with storage. The impact is felt throughout the supply chain, in terms of the cargo size, the selected port, and inland logistics.&nbsp; Over the next several years, trading will become an important intermediary for balancing excess volumes and matching demand to destination. With an average capex cost of $500 to $700 per metric ton to build storage, financing the movement of volume becomes a cost-effective and creative alternative. A trader could move a handymax across the ocean three times for less than the annual cost per metric ton of storage. While virtual storage will not replace domes and other large-scale storage, small producers should look to aggregators with trading capabilities to manage their production fluctuation and reduce costs. Author: Michele Rebiere Chief Financial Officer, Viridis Energy <a href="mailto:mrebiere@viridisenergy.ca">mrebiere@viridisenergy.ca</a> 905-847-5226

2014/09/Pel-Biomass-Mribiere-1014_14108977733664_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/Pel-Biomass-Mribiere-1014_14108977733664_thumb.jpg

2014/09/Pel-Biomass-Mribiere-1014_14108977733664.jpg

Viridis Energy Chief Financial Officer Michele Rebiere offers three predictions for the future of the global wood pellet industry.

The Future of Pellets

Corn stover and other biomass crop residues are frequently referred to as &ldquo;trash&rdquo; or agricultural waste, suggesting it has little value. These terms are deceiving, now more than ever, with this &ldquo;trash&rdquo; being collected for valuable uses both on and off the farm. This is perhaps most evident at three commercial-scale cellulosic ethanol facilities that have been built in the Corn Belt, where the bulk of corn stover resides. Capitalizing on this location, within the next year, the facilities expect to convert the surrounding stover into biofuel.&nbsp;
 Over 100 million tons of corn stover is available annually, making it the largest quantity of biomass residue in the U.S. The state with the most biomass is Iowa, where DuPont and Poet-DSM have constructed cellulosic ethanol facilities. It is estimated that 75 million dry tons of stover can be sustainably harvested each year. DuPont&rsquo;s facility in Nevada is expected to consume 375,000 tons of corn stover from approximately 190,000 acres each year, resulting in 30 MMgy of biofuel. Poet-DSM&rsquo;s Project Liberty site in Emmetsburg will source roughly 285,000 bone-dry tons (BDT) of corn residue biomass annually, producing 20 to 25 MMgy.
 Collecting the massive amounts of stover required to feed these facilities each year is no small task. How to approach this supply chain in a sustainable manner is perhaps even more daunting and, to further complicate the matter, mixed views surround this fairly new concept. Some corn growers view it as an opportunity to get more value from their agricultural land; others are slower to trial, and adopt with concerns about the impacts its removal could have on the condition of their soil. Some landlords and environmentalists share in the uncertainty. Stover has been harvested for purposes like animal feed and bedding for years, however, biofuel production at this scale is a fairly recent development. &ldquo;Partial stover harvest is a new and unique tool for managing corn residues,&rdquo; says John Pieper, stover feedstock workstream lead with DuPont.
 This new tool has yet to be understood by many, and seems to linger as the main cause of uncertainty. Both Poet-DSM and DuPont have been working with researchers at Iowa State University, the USDA, the National Soil Conservation Service, growers, equipment manufacturers and other stakeholders to create sustainable stover removal plans. These programs are focused on partial stover removal, to not only leave behind a sufficient amount to meet the critical needs of the soil, but also remove enough to purpose it for biofuel production.
 Food, Feed and Now Fuel
 Partnering with farmers has been paramount to the ethanol producers getting cellulosic plants on line. Stover must be harvested from a wide number of fields to feed the plant; in fact, 400 or more farmers are currently supplying stover to each facility. &ldquo;The growers themselves need to be comfortable, not only if it is something that makes sense to them economically, but also sustainably for their field and their crops,&rdquo; says Steve Hartig, general manager of licensing with Poet-DSM Advanced Biofuels.
 Poet-DSM has two types of biomass contracts for growers to market their biomass. The Grower Model says the grower is responsible for aligning the baling, staging, storage and transportation of biomass from the field to the biorefinery. They can choose to perform these tasks themselves, custom hire the job, or a mix of both. According to the Custom Model Contract, the grower harvests the grain forming the windrow, then informs the Poet-DSM biomass team, who take over from there. &ldquo;The key is to show them this is part of having a sustainable and profitable business,&rdquo; Hartig says.&nbsp;
 Corn farmer Mike Greenfield, is participating in DuPont&rsquo;s corn stover collection program. &ldquo;Really, for us, they have become a very integral part of how we manage our operation, it is a true partnership, and we&rsquo;ve signed a longer-term contract with them for most of our acres,&rdquo; Greenfield says.
 The reason for the commitment is that, for Greenfield&rsquo;s farming operation, it is a perfect match. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re corn-on-corn, and have been for several years,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Almost all of our ground has hog manure on it, so that makes our operation a natural fit.&rdquo;
 Like Greenfield, farmers with manure resources can add it as a fertilizer to their cornfields to improve organic matter levels after stover removal. Cover crops also help maintain organic matter levels in the soil.
 When the Time is Right
 Manure and cover crop use are elements that should be considered when deciding how much stover to remove sustainably. Other factors include slope, tillage, rotation and crop yield. &ldquo;Growers need to take a look at it on a field-by-field basis, and get the help they need to work through that information,&rdquo; says Marty Adkins, assistant state conservationist for special projects with the NRCS.
 Studies conducted at Iowa State University say level fields are best for harvesting stover, recommending not to harvest stover in field areas where slope exceeds 2 to 3 percent. The studies also show that a corn or soybean rotation contributes less soil organic matter than continuous corn. Some believe a crop rotation is needed to maximize corn yields, Pieper says, and in effect, this way of thinking results in a slow movement to adopt a new tool like partial stover harvest. Yield level is also important because high-yielding fields consequently yield the most biomass.&nbsp;
 As grain yields increase, residues become difficult to manage into a successful subsequent corn crop, according to Pieper. High-yielding fields are a good candidate for stover removal. &ldquo;A focus on leaving a sustainable, general 2.2 tons per acre, for conventional tillage volume, allows for an economical harvest rate&mdash;2 tons&mdash;on highly productive fields yielding greater than 180 bushels per acre of corn on average,&rdquo; Pieper says.
&nbsp;
 Baling the Biomass
 Everything from the way each field is assessed to how much stover is collected is essential to the sustainability of the field&rsquo;s soil health. Baling practices must also be attuned to soil health. After the windrow is created, most biomass should be baled 24 to 48 hours after harvesting if weather permits. DuPont&rsquo;s biomass team works with farmers to bale only large square bales (3 foot x 4 foot x 8 foot) of corn stover at this time. Pieper explains that productive fields with a low slope producing a little over 4 tons of stover per acre can support partial stover harvest three out of four years on continuous corn fields, and two out of five corn years on corn-soybean-rotated fields, targeting two tons per acre.&nbsp;&nbsp;
 Poet-DSM is removing about one BDT per acre, which translates to about 20 percent of available biomass. The primary feedstock to Project Liberty is created from the stover into a specific bale line called the EZ Bale, which can be either round or square. &ldquo;What we look at with the EZ Bale is the combination, so it has some of the cob and some of the stalk and a lot of the leaves,&rdquo; Hartig said. &ldquo;The composition is the ideal fuel we want to run, and the way it is gathered you tend to get a lot less rocks and dirt and organics.&rdquo;
 Innovation in feedstock composition is accompanied by equipment improvements and adaptations for efficient and safe stover harvests. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s forefront on everything we would develop, it has to be good for the farmer and the soil and be sustainable or it won&rsquo;t work,&rdquo; says Glenn Farris, marketing manager for biomass with Agco Corporation.
 Agco and other equipment manufacturers in the space are focused on limiting the amount of passes through the field. Agco supplies some tractors and a portion of the balers for all three cellulosic projects. Currently it has a single-pass system and is developing a high-take corn header for release in 2016. One piece of equipment isn&rsquo;t going to be the answer for all stover harvesting needs, Farris says. &ldquo;There is never going to be one single solution, depending on conditions, land type, weather and everything else,&rdquo; he adds. &ldquo;There needs to be a full array of solutions to pick and choose from.&rdquo;
 Agco has made improvements as a result of the call to remove stover for biorefineries. The large square baler, Massey Ferguson or Challenger 2270XD, has received a 90 percent heavier flywheel and shear bolts and larger hydraulic tension cylinders and a new Opti-Form extended bale chamber for denser, square-shouldered bales among other improvements according to Ken Wagenbach, business development and equipment specialist for biomass with Agco.
 Sustaining Relationships and Harvests
 Once baled, the stover is usually stored in stacks on the edge of the grower&rsquo;s field until transported to the biorefinery. Some stover is also stored at stackyards on site. Round bales, according to Poet-DSM, typically store better than square bales that are not tarped. Single row and pyramid are stacking options for round bales, with single rows holding the advantage when it comes to dry matter loss and maintaining the bale&rsquo;s shape. It is recommended that square bales are tarped if stored long term over the summer months to avoid excessive weathering. Deliveries of biomass are based on the contract period. &ldquo;What we are trying to do is make it as easy as possible for the growers to bring biomass to us,&rdquo; Hartig says.
 As easy as possible is the goal for now, while feedstock supply chains continue to be optimized, but a great deal of work lies ahead. &ldquo;Challenges include managing soil inclusion, moisture and remaining cover while optimizing cost, optimally capitalizing on a new supply chain,&rdquo; Pieper says.
 This new supply chain must create a year&rsquo;s supply of biomass in an approximately 70-day window, he continues, during which there are 28 days or more (97 percent of years) when harvest is possible. &ldquo;All this must be done without hindering our cooperating farmers in the successful management of other fall field work that must be undertaken,&rdquo; Pieper says.&nbsp;
 Ethanol producers recognize the importance of working with various stakeholders to sustainably acquire feedstock for their facilities. Population projections support the assertion that in the next 50 years, humans must produce as much food as has been produced throughout history. Additional food production means more of the &ldquo;trash&rdquo; left in the fields will need to be Managed. Maintaining soil is imperative in the continuation and boosting of mass crop production. Adkins agrees, &ldquo;Working with the farmers to maintain the soil health has never been more important.&rdquo; Author: Katie Fletcher Staff Writer, Biomass Magazine 701-738-4920 <a href="mailto:kfletcher@bbiinternational.com">kfletcher@bbiinternational.com</a>

SINGLE-PASS SYSTEM: AGCOâ€™s Massey Ferguson 2270XD baler collects stover during Iowa 2013 harvest.

2014/09/AdBio-Biomass-AGCO-1014_1410895077698_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/AdBio-Biomass-AGCO-1014_1410895077698_thumb.jpg

2014/09/AdBio-Biomass-AGCO-1014_1410895077698.jpg

NEW CORN THROUIGH COVER: Soil Health Management System practices including conservation tillage practices with the use of cover crops can significantly reduce input costs, drought-protect crops and conserve soil and water resources. 

2014/09/AdBio-Biomass-Corn-1014_14108950801017.jpg

SUSTAINABLE STACKYARD: The biomass stackyard is a 22-acre area used to store as much as 30,000 tons of material for Poet-DSMâ€™s plant, enough for about four weeks of operation.

2014/09/AdBio-Biomass-stackyard-1014_14108950816787.jpg

NET WRAP REMOVAL: Bales of corn cobs, leaves, husk and some stalk are loaded onto a conveyor where the net wrap is removed. The material is then sent to a grinder.

2014/09/AdBio-Biomass-Wrap-1014_14108950827686.jpg

Although corn stover offers a second valuable crop from the same acres, there's a whole lot more to the equation than simply removing it from the soil. 

Sourcing Stover Sustainably

I was fortunate enough to close out this past summer with a Labor Day weekend vacation, where I found myself in front of a campfire making s&rsquo;mores. A time-honored summer tradition, and a simple pleasure indeed.
 As my mind wandered, it landed on the fact that I was burning biomass to roast my marshmallow. I also reflected that this three-day weekend was dedicated to the millions of men and women who built this great nation. Our dams. Our roads. Our skycrapers, submarines and jumbo jets.
 It made me focus on the fact that today, our world is at an inflection point. Record droughts in California create bathtub rings around our country&rsquo;s most iconic lakes and reservoirs. Toxic algae blooms leave vast swathes of lakes unswimmable at best, and uninhabitable for many species at worst.
 These issues are the result of phenomena both man-made and natural, yet both are accentuated by the simple fact that we are struggling to meet the demands of a growing population. We are at the front end of a massive demand curve for just about everything that matters&mdash;energy, food, water&mdash;resources that must be managed carefully to ensure a sustainable future.
 It may seem hopeless at times, but I believe the answer to these challenges is right in front of us. It&rsquo;s technology, not ideology, philosophy or orthodoxy. Technology is giving us seeds that are more productive than ever before in human history. Technology is giving us new ways to use waste biomass. Technology is giving us new fertilizers that aren't derived from petroleum. And, technology is helping us reinvent how we farm, upending the notion that &ldquo;harvest&rdquo; is a season of the year.
 The U.S. algae industry is at the forefront of addressing these seemingly intractable problems of concerns over water and land. More than 100 companies are working day and night to leverage the incredible attributes of algae to drive supply in the food, feed and fuel industries. While it&rsquo;s true that the early days of the algae industry were focused on algae-to-fuel pathways, today&rsquo;s industry is incredibly diversified. There are companies designing algal oils for use in the food products industry, companies marketing nutriceuticals, drugs, cosmetics and health supplements derived from algae, and some of the most popular consumer health juices, including those from Odwalla and Naked, contain algae (spirulina). In addition, both algae producers and end-customers in the animal nutrition industries are looking to algae-derived proteins for their products.
 Let&rsquo;s not forget Omega-3 fatty acids, either. Increasingly, companies are turning to algae rather than animal or fish sources for Omega-3s, given cost, volatility and concerns about sustainability. I made the case in a recent article in a trade magazine for Omega-3 suppliers of all types, that algae will one day be the dominant supplier of Omega-3s.
 All the while, demonstration and commercial facilities for the production of algae-based biofuels are underway.
 Why algae, why now? It&rsquo;s simple. What we&rsquo;ve known, and what has been proven, about algae during the past two decades, is simply now more important than ever. The world needs a new crop that grows prolifically on small amounts of land, doesn&rsquo;t compete with traditional agriculture, and can recycle rather than release nutrients. It must also require fresh water or months of growth before harvest, and be able to produce a variety of products for a variety of industries.
 Like other biomass options, a robust algae industry will result in increased jobs and economic development here in the U.S., jobs that can&rsquo;t be outsourced and, in many cases, will be created in rural areas hit hard by the recession.
 We live in a time when raw materials that used to be free or plentiful are no longer available. Scarcity and volatility in commodity markets have driven up the price for many staples, including animal feed, fertilizer and water. Yet, at the same time, the demand for these commodities on a global scale continues upward, unabated. So, the case for biomass is really no longer a question of being &ldquo;green&rdquo; or being &ldquo;sustainable,&rdquo; rather it is a necessity to be able to meet the demands of a growing population. It's about building a great future. Author: Matt Carr Executive Director, Algae Biomass Organization <a href="http://www.algaebiomass.org">www.algaebiomass.org</a> 877-531-5512

2014/09/QA-Biomass-Matt-0914_14108952041879_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/QA-Biomass-Matt-0914_14108952041879_thumb.jpg

2014/09/QA-Biomass-Matt-0914_14108952041879.jpg

The case for biomass is really no longer a question of being â€œgreenâ€� or being â€œsustainable,â€� rather it is a necessity to be able to meet the demands of a growing population. It's about building a great future.

Reflecting on the Future

SG Preston plans to build a 120 MMgy renewable diesel facility in in Lawrence County, Ohio. Technology employed at the plant will be licensed from Honeywell UOP. The Lawrence County Economic Development Council is investing 62 acres in land and other incentives in the project. The Appalachian Partnership for Economic Growth and Jobs-Ohio were also instrumental in securing the investment and technology.
 The $400 million project is expected to be complete in 2017. Pre-engineering studies were slated to begin in September.
 &ldquo;For SG Preston, this is an important milestone and part of a larger vision of partnering with leading, global refining technology partners and local communities to develop a portfolio of renewable diesel and renewable jet fuel refineries targeting 1.2 billion gallons per year, or 20 percent of the federal [renewable fuel standard] biomass-based mandate for biofuels,&rdquo; said R. Delbert LeTang, CEO of SG Preston.

SG Preston announces renewable diesel project 

Virent Inc. has received fuel registration from the U.S. EPA for its BioForm gasoline in blends of up to 45 percent. As a registered fuel, Virent&rsquo;s biogasoline can now be used in on-highway motor vehicles.
 &ldquo;Securing EPA registration of our BioForm gasoline is further confirmation of Virent&rsquo;s high quality drop-in fuel and is another step towards commercializing our technology to produce renewable fuels and chemicals from biobased feedstocks,&rdquo; said Lee Edwards, CEO and president of Virent.
 The BioForm gasoline was produced by Virent at its 10,000-gallon-per-year demonstration plant in Madison, Wisconsin. The biofuel was blended with conventional gasoline and underwent testing at the Southwest Research Institute. Results showed that emissions from the blended fuel were well below the maximum permitted by current regulations. EPA testing work was funded by Virent partner Royal Dutch Shell.

2014/09/News-Biomass-AdBio-1014-01_14108959002065.jpg

Virent earns EPA registration for renewable gasoline 

Biomass industry insiders agree that there are many good reasons to make the switch from gasoline and diesel fuel to renewable, compressed natural gas (CNG) or liquefied natural gas (LNG), but key to the continued expansion of the sector is the continued push for awareness outside of the industry.
 CNG, which works best for short trips, is derived from organic waste and costs less than petroleum fuels, burns cleaner and produces less greenhouse gas. Meanwhile, LNG, which works with long-haul, on-highway Class 8 trucks, offers an energy density comparable to petrol and diesel fuels, extending range and reducing refueling frequency.
 There are many programs set up to take advantage of incorporating biogas into transportation operations&mdash;big household names such as P&amp;G and Owens Corning are incorporating natural gas into their transportation logistics&mdash;and an increasing number of companies specializing in assisting fuel switch. Mark Stoermann, director of operations for ampCNG, a Chicago-based energy company focused on displacing liquid fuels with CNG, says CNG is seeing increased acceptance as a lower-cost, domestically produced alternative to diesel fuel. &ldquo;Since the introduction of the Cummins 11.9L 400HP engine, there has been a significant increase in both interest and purchases of CNG-powered vehicles for dedicated fleets,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;The production of renewable natural gas from biogas is a proven way to reduce waste and produce a replacement for fossil fuels.&rdquo;
 AmpCNG converts large trucking fleets&mdash;for brands like Frito-Lay and Subaru&mdash; from diesel to CNG and, to support these operations, is also building a network of fueling stations for long-haul truck fleets throughout the country. &ldquo;One of the biggest challenges in the growth of CNG as a low-cost, domestically produced transportation fuel is that there is currently limited fueling infrastructure,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;AmpCNG partners with fleets to build ultrafast fill CNG stations that are located along their key routes and open to the public for fueling.&rdquo;
 William Zobel, vice president of market development and strategy at Chicago-based Trillium CNG, which provides CNG fueling solutions and equipment, including the proprietary Pinnacle line of hydraulic intensifier compressors, says there are a lot more natural gas vehicles available for purchase now than there were a year ago, with Ford, GM and Chrysler all expanding their lineups of natural gas-ready trucks. &ldquo;The way that projects are being financed is also changing,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;It used to be that municipal agencies would look to the federal government for funding, but now the government is strapped for cash, so they are turning to vendors and using public-private partnerships to finance natural gas transportation projects. The whole industry is moving very quickly in all aspects, not only with commercial trucks, but also with the mass transit and refuse sectors.&rdquo;
 Charlie Stevenson, fleet operations manager at water utility group Aqua America, says the company&rsquo;s decision to invest in compressed natural gas to fuel its fleet was not a hard one. Aqua serves nearly 3 million people in Pennsylvania, Ohio, North Carolina, Illinois, Texas, New Jersey, Indiana and Virginia. In 2012, the company invested $130,000 in a time-fill station at its Springfield, Pennsylvania, operations center, and it&rsquo;s grown since. Plans are also in the works to install time-fill stations at the company&rsquo;s Willow Grove, Montgomery County, and West Chester, Chester County, operations centers. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re a green company and always look at all types of alternatives,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;In fact, we bought our first CNG vehicle back in 1997. This time, we were looking at the stability of fuel pricing, and CNG has been pretty flatlined at around $2 per gas-gallon equivalent and it made sense.&rdquo;
 To date, the company has invested $675,000 in CNG through vehicle purchases and infrastructure upgrades, and it expects to have 90 CNG vehicles in operation within the next five years.
 Patrick Serfass, executive director of the American Biogas Council, says there are lots of places where there should be focus on renewable and natural gas and the role biogas can play as a transportation fuel is an important one. &ldquo;The main benefits come from the biogas systems themselves,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;They not only produce renewable energy, but they recycle our organic waste, and in doing so, they help our soil, air and water. A lot of people scratch their heads and don&rsquo;t understand how you can make motor vehicle fuel out of waste, and we need to build awareness.&rdquo;
 According to Serfass, natural gas fuel costs up to $1.50 less per gallon than gasoline or diesel, and the use of natural gas fuel not only reduces operating costs for vehicles, but also reduces greenhouse gas emissions up to 30 percent in light-duty vehicles and 23 percent in medium- to heavy-duty vehicles.
 The state of Ohio is flexing its competitive muscle by considering legislation (HB 336 proposed by Reps. Michael O&rsquo;Brien and David Hall) that would offer tax credits to residents and grants to public fleets for the purchase or conversion of alternative fuel vehicles. &ldquo;Widespread use of CNG as fuel has the potential to significantly decrease the cost of transporting goods across the state, giving Ohio, a state rich in natural gas reserves, a big competitive advantage,&rdquo; says Caroline Henry, vice president of marketing for quasar energy group in Cleveland, Ohio, which has three CNG stations open to the public in Columbus, Zanesville and Wooster.
 Sam Spofforth, executive director of Clean Fuels Ohio, says there&rsquo;s been an incredible amount of growth in Ohio for CNG, with a small increase in LNG facilities.
 &ldquo;Looking at it from the perspective of a station developer and a fleet, biogas is pretty cost-competitive with conventional natural gas in transportation applications,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s also very stable in price. You know what your costs are going to be, the cost recovery you will need and there&rsquo;s consistency in feedstock values. And obviously, there are enormous environmental benefits with a tremendous net reduction in greenhouse gasses and the avoided methane emissions.&rdquo;
 Clean Energy, which focuses on both CNG and LNG, is planning to open several stations in the state in 2015.
 Challenges Abound
 When it comes to the expanded use of introducing biogas to transportation fuel, the biggest challenge is the availability of CNG fueling stations. According to the U.S. DOE, there are only 743 CNG fueling stations in the U.S., and just 58 LNG stations.
 Henry says that the legislation being proposed in Ohio would encourage fueling station owners in Ohio to add CNG pumps to their locations in order to respond to the increased demand for alternative fuels.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
 Other challenges are the cost of anaerobic digestion, the biogas upgrading system and the ongoing operation of these processes.
 Zobel believes financing biogas projects has been the biggest challenge, and it would help if there were government policies in place that could help further educate the public on the benefits that biogas brings, and financing backstops to ensure government incentives used to justify the investment will not evaporate with a change in administration. &ldquo;Developers are looking for investors with a direct outlet for the gas to finance the project, but often these people don&rsquo;t know enough about the project to make an informed investment decision,&rdquo; Zobel says. &ldquo;Some banks struggle too&mdash;it works on paper and there are case studies to prove it works, but most people just aren&rsquo;t well-informed enough about it and the biogas manufacturing process is sensitive.&rdquo;
 Kevin Matthews, president of Genox Transportation, La Porte, Texas, which transports LNG with its fleet of 30 trailers, says the trucks being built today running off LNG are certainly better than those built just three or four years ago, but with so few stations available, it&rsquo;s sometimes hard to keep things running. &ldquo;With fuel being your second highest cost, and having the potential to save up to 40 percent, why wouldn&rsquo;t you do it?&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Many of the states are offering grants that allow you to buy trucks for roughly the same as you can buy a diesel truck.&rdquo;
 Stevenson says the fact that CNG can&rsquo;t be used for long trips is also a challenge that keeps people away. &ldquo;With our CNG vehicles, we can only get about 210 miles before they're out of fuel, so you really need to plan your trips accordingly,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;When they go out, they come back from the same destination each day. Because of this, we can buy a slow-filling station, upwards of $150,000, as opposed to a fast-filling station, upward of $1.5 million, which keeps a lot of people out of the business.&rdquo;
 RIN Generation
 Biogas is now eligible for RIN generation under the renewable fuel standard, an initiative that clearly helps offset the cost of biogas projects and brings more low-carbon fuel to the marketplace. Zobel says there is a certain number of cost elements that go into each project, and the RIN generation under the renewable fuel standard helps with the revenue side of things.
 Stoermann adds transportation fuel, like CNG that is produced from biogas, has been approved for several years. &ldquo;Renewable Dairy Fuels, a subsidiary of ampCNG has been issuing RINs since September of 2012,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;The recent action of the EPA broadened the definition of the wastes that were eligible, and created a two-tier system of RINs that should increase the opportunity to recover the costs of producing a renewable transportation fuel.&rdquo;
 Quasar&rsquo;s Zanesville and Columbus fueling stations are already approved under the RFS to generate RINs.&nbsp; According to Henry, the new rules will qualify anaerobic digesters processing biosolids and manure under a new category&mdash;cellulosic (or D3)&mdash;where previously these feedstocks were categorized under D5.
 The RFS program changes are a big help to expanding the industry, Storemann adds. &ldquo;Thousands of tons of waste are disposed of into landfills every year, and technology exists to convert this waste into energy. The key to making this happen is to offer a return to the companies that invest in this technology, and the expansion of the RIN program by the EPA is a step in the right direction.&rdquo; Author: Keith Loria Freelance writer, Biomass Magazine <a href="mailto:freelancekeith@gmail.com">freelancekeith@gmail.com</a>

WATER AND CNG MIX:  Aqua America, a water utility group that serves nearly 3 million people in eight states, made its first investment in CNG infrastructure in 1997 and has greatly expanded its use since then.

2014/09/Bio-Biomass-aqua-1014_14108964779946_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/Bio-Biomass-aqua-1014_14108964779946_thumb.jpg

2014/09/Bio-Biomass-aqua-1014_14108964779946.jpg

CNG FOR ALL: Quasar energy group has three CNG stations open to the public in Columbus, Zanesville and Wooster, Ohio.

2014/09/Bio-BIomass-quasar1-1014_14108964806371.jpg

Slowly but surely and not without hurdles, renewable, compressed natural gas and liquefied natural gas infrastructure is expanding in the U.S.

Compressed Potential

Biogas advocates and project developers have been abuzz since mid-July, when the U.S. EPA released a renewable fuel standard (RFS) final rule that allows eligible biogas transportation fuel pathways to generate cellulosic renewable information numbers (RINS). Prior to the rule, biogas transportation projects were eligible to generate advanced biofuel RINS. The cellulosic fuel pool within the RFS is much larger than the advanced biofuel pool. Statutory renewable fuel obligations by 2022 are 16 billion gallons of cellulosic biofuel and 4 billion gallons of advanced biofuel. The EPA is responsible for determining an annual renewable fuel volume obligation for the different fuel pools, and each year has significantly reduced the obligation from statutory requirements because fuel production expectations have fallen short.
 Allowing biogas transportation fuel pathways to generate RFS cellulosic credits represents an amazing opportunity for biogas project development. There is an incredible amount of organic waste feedstocks that could be processed in biogas energy systems. Biogas energy systems also present an opportunity to establish perennial feedstocks. I wrote about the topic in my January column, but would like look at what this could mean for the biogas industry by looking at a proposed project with a visionary model.
 Readers of Biomass Magazine might already be familiar with a project in northern Missouri developed and constructed by Roeslein Alternative Energy. It has an ambitious vison to produce 50 million diesel gallon equivalents by the end of the decade using biogas from hog manure and energy crops. In addition to producing a large volume of low-carbon transportation fuel from cleaned and compressed biogas, the project aims to restore 30 million acres of highly erodible land to native grasslands over the next 30 years. Grasses and other perennial species would be feedstock input for biogas energy systems.
 Achieving this vision will require a multiphase plan. Recently, I had the opportunity to speak with Rudi Roeslein, CEO of Roeslein Alternative Energy, about the planned approach. The first phase of the project is already underway. RAE and project partner Murphy-Brown of Missouri announced the commencement of the installation of impermeable covers on 88 existing hog manure lagoons. The next project phase will implement biogas cleaning and conditioning equipment to produce a source of renewable natural gas (RNG) and establish a network of distribution centers to provide RNG to vehicle fleets. The third phase will establish a demonstration project using aboveground anaerobic digestion systems to process hog manure and perennial feedstocks.
 Murphy Brown, in cooperation with the Missouri Prairie Foundation, the Missouri Department of Conservation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Natural Resources Conservation Service, planted 400 acres of prairie plantings that could be used as part of the testing program. In addition, for the past five years, Roeslein Northern Missouri Real Estate has been replanting and restoring native grassland and prairie on its 1,650-acre farm located within the project area, and has adequate feedstock to test in the demonstration project. The University of Minnesota has been engaged by Roeslein Alternative Energy in the testing of various feedstocks to evaluate the potential methane yield and help evaluate ecological services such feedstock would provide. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
 The Roeslein project vision and all of the potential economic and environmental benefits is exciting and inspiring. The project will significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions by capturing methane from hog manure, sequester carbon in perennial grasslands, and displacing diesel fuel with RNG. The project will also result in improved water quality and establish habitat for wildlife. There are also economic benefits in the form of job creation, local economic activity for construction and operations, and increased farm income from energy crop purchases.&nbsp;
 The EPA&rsquo;s recent action expanding biogas transportation fuel pathways to generate cellulosic RINs represents an enormous opportunity for project scale-up all across the U.S. This will be the year that we see commercial-scale production of cellulosic ethanol using corn stover as a feedstock. These first-of-a-kind liquid renewable fuel projects need an enormous amount of feedstock to begin operation.Biogas energy projects could play a role in helping to establish energy crops for future projects. They do not require as much feedstock volume as liquid renewable fuel projects, but could immediately provide a market for producers willing to establish grassland and native perennials on a portion of their land. So many different opportunities are possible for the biogas industry; we just need to reach out and grab them. Author: Amanda Bilek Government Affairs Manager, Great Plains Institute 612-278-7118 <a href="mailto:abilek@gpisd.net">abilek@gpisd.net</a>

2014/09/Bio-Biomass-Bilek-1014_14108967658202_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/Bio-Biomass-Bilek-1014_14108967658202_thumb.jpg

2014/09/Bio-Biomass-Bilek-1014_14108967658202.jpg

Biogas advocates and project developers have been abuzz since mid-July, when the U.S. EPA released a renewable fuel standard (RFS) final rule that allows eligible biogas transportation fuel pathways to generate cellulosic RINs.

A Visionary Model for Biogas Projects

The USDA, in partnership with the U.S. EPA and U.S. Department of Energy, has published its Biogas Opportunities Roadmap, a document that builds on progress made to date to identify voluntary actions that can be taken to reduce methane emissions through the use of biogas systems. It outlines strategies to overcome barriers limiting further expansion and development of a robust biogas industry in the U.S.
 The Biogas Opportunities Roadmap is related to President Obama&rsquo;s Climate Action Plan, which was released in June 2013, and the Climate Action Plan Strategy to Reduce Methane Emissions, which was released by the White House in March.
 The roadmap estimates there are currently approximately 2,000 sites in the U.S. producing biogas. With proper support, more than 11,000 additional biogas systems could be deployed in the U.S. &ldquo;If fully realized, these biogas systems could produce enough energy to power more than 3 million American homes and reduce methane emissions equivalent to 4 to 54 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions in 2030,&rdquo; the report said.

Biogas Opportunities Roadmap released 

New York City is planning an expansion of its anaerobic digester pilot program launched last summer at the Newton Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant in Greenpoint.
 The purpose of the one-year pilot was to test the logistics of source separating food waste, collection of the waste, preprocessing by Waste Management and injection into the wastewater treatment plant digesters, said Anthony Fiore, director of New York City&rsquo;s Department of Environmental Protection Office of Energy.
 From April 2013 to May 2014, the facility processed between 1.5 and 2 tons of source separate organic waste (SSO) a day. This winter, the project will be scaled up over a three-year period beginning at 50 tons per day to 250 tons per day. &ldquo;This volume of SSO will allow us to better understand the ability to source separate waste from both residential and commercial sectors, the efficiency of processing the material into a consistent bioslurry and the costs and benefits of treating food waste in anaerobic digesters,&rdquo; Fiore said.

Building on Success: The New York City anaerobic digester pilot program has eight tanks. The facility is collocated with the Newton Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant in Greenpoint. 

2014/09/News-Biomass-Biogas-1014_14108968804889.jpg

NYC expands food waste-to-energy pilot 

Fish, wildlife and the habitats they depend on not only enrich our lives, they support our economy.&nbsp; Every year, outdoor recreation contributes about $650 billion to the American economy and supports 6.1 million jobs&mdash;nearly one in 20 of all U.S. jobs. Hunting, fishing, and other wildlife-dependent recreation alone generates $145 billion per year. Bioenergy production from restoration and/or sustainable management of existing native plant communities offers some of the best opportunities to help meet U.S. energy goals while, at the same time, conserving fish and wildlife. With attention to advance planning and the assistance of state fish and wildlife agencies and other conservation partners, we can meet the nation&rsquo;s energy goals and sustain native fish and wildlife.&nbsp;
 Opportunities to collaborate include:
 Forests. Removal of small-diameter woody material from overstocked native forests can help restore forest health and ecologically site-appropriate diversity, as well as reduce wildfire risk.&nbsp; Selective thinning of plantation forests, particularly pine stands in the southeastern U.S., could also benefit wildlife such as the bobwhite quail.&nbsp;
 Grasslands. The restoration of native grasses such as big bluestem, indiangrass and switchgrass on prairie landscapes where land was previously converted to agricultural row crops, such as in the northern Great Plains, could provide producers with the flexibility to use the biomass for energy purposes or livestock forage, depending on market needs.&nbsp; Wildlife may benefit through the return of native plant communities that are among the most highly diminished of any in the world (more than a 99 percent loss).
 Invasive Species Removal. Invasive plants cost $120 billion per year to control and are a contributing factor in more than 400 threatened or endangered species listings in this country.&nbsp; Harvest of these plants for biomass, with eradication as the goal, could benefit fish, wildlife and their native habitats while also reducing associated economic impacts.
 Waste Materials. It makes sense to use readily available waste materials when possible before placing more land into bioenergy production.&nbsp; Yard waste, debris from natural disasters such as wind throw, and other municipal solid waste can provide substantial biomass instead of filling landfills.
 Rights of Way. Utility, highways, and other ROW require management, which could be coordinated with bioenergy production if planted with site-appropriate native biomass.
 The more a land use like energy crop production can mimic a native habitat, the more favorable the impact on fish and wildlife.&nbsp; The biggest factor contributing to fish and wildlife declines is habitat loss.&nbsp; State fish and wildlife agencies and other conservation partners can help reduce habitat risks associated with bioenergy production.&nbsp;
 Risks include:
 Land Conversion. Many energy crops are designed to grow on marginal lands not suitable for agricultural production, lands that are now supporting wildlife. A recent report prepared for the U.S.DOE suggested that 79 million acres of cropland and pasture may need to be redirected to energy crops to meet domestic liquid energy goals, an area the size of Missouri and Iowa combined.&nbsp;
Biomass for other energy purposes, such as international markets or heat production, would be additive to that. It seems unlikely that this can be accomplished without conversion of remaining native ecosystems, either directly or indirectly, which makes advanced thought and planning crucial.
 Aggressive Plants. Many energy crops are selected or genetically modified to grow rapidly, increase yields, be disease and pest resistant, and adapt to a wide variety of soils and climates.&nbsp; Unfortunately, these are also the characteristics of species that may become invasive.&nbsp; If native plants and cultivars are not used, prevention is the best tool to deter invasive species problems.&nbsp; Developing an effective containment plan with the engagement of state fish and wildlife agencies is the best way to reduce risks.
 Reduced Diversity. Energy crop production often maximizes yield with dense, single-species plantings. Unfortunately, wildlife populations decline when native habitat is replaced by plantings that contain fewer species.&nbsp; Adding structural diversity (e.g., different mowing heights and times) and species diversity (e.g., legumes to replace soil nitrogen) can reduce negative impacts.
 Harvest Timing. Wildlife need diverse plants for food during the spring and summer, either to consume directly or provide a substrate for insects that, in turn, serve as food.&nbsp; In the late fall or winter, vegetative cover becomes more important to avoid predators and harsh weather.&nbsp; Management that avoids harvest in spring and early summer, leaves field borders and minimizes the use of pesticides and herbicides can benefit wildlife and reduce producer costs.
 Can bioenergy development and sound fish and wildlife management coexist?&nbsp; The answer is, &ldquo;It depends.&rdquo; It is important for society to consider our natural resources in the economic equation if bioenergy is to be truly sustainable over the long term.&nbsp; The following are some general guidelines for bioenergy development that can be adapted locally to help achieve mutually compatible goals:
 Crop Establishment
 &bull; Avoid conversion of already diminished native habitats to establish energy crops.
 &bull; Use ecologically site-appropriate native species that match the native ecosystem.
 &bull; Develop containment plans with the involvement of state fish and wildlife agencies if aggressive nonnative species are under consideration.
 &bull; Mixed species plantings, especially those with native wildflowers and legumes, provide better habitat than monocultures.
 &bull; Break up single-species plantings into blocks of diversified crops to minimize risk to wildlife.
 Water Quality/Quantity
 &bull; Plant buffers of native plant species between feedstock plantings, neighboring habitats, and waterways.&nbsp; Wider is better, especially around water sources.
 &bull; Minimize use of water and select energy crops that use water efficiently.
 &bull; Minimize use of fertilizers, pesticides and herbicides and avoid using them near streams or other water bodies.
 &bull; Wetlands, rivers, streams, or other natural aquatic habitats should not be used for energy crops, particularly for algae production, which should be produced only in closed systems with primary and secondary containment plans in place.
 &bull; Harvest invasive species, including aquatics, but keep the focus on reduction or elimination.
 Energy Crop Harvest
 &bull; Harvest crops in late summer or fall to avoid primary nesting and calving seasons.
 &bull; Leave residual stubble (more than 10 inches recommended) or harvest early enough to allow for some fall regrowth for wildlife cover.
 &bull; Consider leaving a portion of the field unharvested each year; harvest in blocks instead of strips.
 &bull; Consider leaving corridors for wildlife to travel between habitats; make as wide as possible.
 &bull; Develop and enforce a sanitation and containment plan to ensure transportation of energy crops and moving of harvesting equipment does not spread potentially invasive species. General Recommendations
 &bull; Contact your local wildlife resource agencies to customize these best management guidelines to meet the needs of the bioenergy project and fish and wildlife species in need of attention in your area.
&nbsp;
*Editor's note: This article originally stated that wildlife may benefit through the return of native plant communities that are among the most highly diminished of any in the world (less than a 99 percent loss). It has been corrected to say more than a 99 percent loss.
*The article also recommended leaving residual stubble (less&nbsp;than 10 inches) or harvest early enough to allow for some fall regrowth for wildlife cover. It has been corrected to read more than 10 inches recommended.
 Author: Association of Fish &amp; Wildlife Agencies <a href="http://www.fishwildlife.org">www.fishwildlife.org</a> 202-624-7890 <a href="mailto:info@fishwildlife.org">info@fishwildlife.org</a>

2014/09/Therm-Biomass-dragonfly-1014_14108970556426_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/Therm-Biomass-dragonfly-1014_14108970556426_thumb.jpg

2014/09/Therm-Biomass-dragonfly-1014_14108970556426.jpg

Fish and Wildlife Agencies can play a role in successful biomass production for bioenergy.


Achieving Sustainability Goals

In my time as a project manager, I&rsquo;ve had the opportunity to work on a number of projects involving the combustion of wood biomass. These projects have included applications such as district heating for university campuses and process steam for manufacturing. I&rsquo;ve seen some organizations make highly effective use of the technology, while others floundered.
 What sets these two groups apart? While every project has its own distinctive challenges, nuances, and advantages, the organizations that are most successful in their decision-making are the ones that have most carefully considered the following three questions: &bull; How readily can you source wood biomass?
 If you have to source woody biomass from across a great distance, expending a great deal of transportation fuel in the process, then the prospect of burning biomass suddenly grows less green, less efficient, and less cost-effective.
 As with any fuel source, decisions about biomass should be made with a high degree of geographical and contextual awareness. Facilities that are located in regions with a heavy concentration on forest products are particularly well-positioned to take advantage of wood biomass as a fuel for district heating, process steam, etc. As the distance between the facility and the fuel source increases, the rationale for wood biomass becomes less compelling.
 Of course, for smaller-scale wood biomass burning solutions, other sources of wood fuel might be available, leading to the next question: &nbsp; &bull; Does your organization already produce suitable wood byproduct?
 Although they may not be located near traditional sources of wood biomass fuel, many businesses, such as those working with plywood, furniture, or wood mulch, may be ideally situated to burn wood biomass in a highly efficient way, making use of waste products that are generated by their operations. Businesses of these types would do well to consider how a wood biomass boiler might be integrated into their processes.
 Regardless of how much promise biomass seems to have for a given business, however, it must have a good answer to the third question: &bull; Have the business&rsquo;s decision makers made an informed, organizational commitment to biomass? Sometimes, lone voices can dominate discussions about energy strategy. But in order to serve an organization most effectively, a biomass solution requires sustained, organization-wide commitment.&nbsp; Once a singular, driving voice is no longer present, a promising effort may fall apart.
 Before making the decision for woody biomass, an organization&rsquo;s decision makers must all be on the same page and be prepared to commit to sourcing and upkeep for the long haul. This may require in-depth consultation as well as education for the organization&rsquo;s decision makers.
 Biomass brings powerful opportunities for sustainability and efficiency for well-situated businesses and institutions that are willing to make a long-term commitment. Through careful analysis and implementation, an organization that has the resources and the will can leverage those opportunities very effectively for the long term.
 Author: John Ward Project Manager, Fosdick &amp; Hilmer Inc. <a href="mailto:feedback@fheng.com">feedback@fheng.com</a> <a href="http://www.fosdickandhilmer.com">www.fosdickandhilmer.com</a>

2014/09/jward2_14109625154561_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/jward2_14109625154561_thumb.jpg

2014/09/jward2_14109625154561.jpg

Biomass brings powerful opportunities for sustainability and efficiency for well-situated businesses and institutions that are willing to make a long-term commitment.

Making the Most of Woody Biomass

Residential wood heating incentives are on a roll, and the industry is beginning to see trends, said John Ackerly, president of the Alliance for Green Heat, during a recent Biomass Thermal Energy Council webinar.
 Residential wood heat has risen dramatically in recent years, Ackerly said, especially in the Northeast and Great Lakes states. &ldquo;In some cases, by 100 percent&hellip; Incentive programs are guiding consumer purchasing and steering people to cleaner and more efficient appliances.&rdquo;
 And it&rsquo;s finally being recognized that wood heat is a real opportunity for incentives that help reduce fossil fuel use. &ldquo;Historically, all of that money and attention has gone into solar and geothermal, and now wood is starting to be included,&rdquo; Ackerly continued.
 Also speaking during the webinar was Adam Sherman, executive director of the Biomass Energy Resource Center, who discussed commercial wood appliance incentives, legislative and financial policies, and Ryan Moore of the New York State Energy Research&nbsp; and Development Authority, who detailed the state&rsquo;s new renewable heat initiative incentives.

BTEC highlights trends in wood heat incentives 

The U.K. Renewable Energy Association and Wood Heat Association are reporting a milestone has been reached under the country&rsquo;s nondomestic Renewable Heating Incentive. According to the associations, as of Aug. 15, 1 gigawatt of renewable heat is being generated in the commercial, industrial and public sectors, with 4,926 accredited wood heating installations at locations including farms, factories, care homes, hotels and churches.
 The RHI has had a significant impact on investments in renewable heat&mdash;particularly bioenergy&mdash;and those investments are forecast to significantly increase over the next several years. U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change statistics indicate that between 2010 and 2012, &pound;760 million ($1.26 billion) was invested in heat from bioenergy, or 56 percent of the total investment in renewable heat over the period. That share is expected to increase to 85 percent from 2013 to 2020.

2014/09/October-2014-BMM-26_14108974358562.jpg

UK nondomestic RHI reaches new milestone 

Nearly 60 percent&ndash;&ndash;more than 430 million acres&ndash;&ndash;of the forested land in the United States is privately owned and managed. Collectively, the lumber and fiber they produce serves a forest products industry worth nearly $200 billion a year, employing nearly 1 million people. These markets are vital to the economies of the regions with forest resources and have created a demand that has kept forest inventories stable for over a hundred years. Recently, the demand for wood pellets for electricity generation in European countries working to drive carbon out of their energy portfolios has created a new market for wood fiber from this resource. Along with this new demand, however, comes rekindled scrutiny about modern forest management practices led largely by nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) who are challenging the sustainability of making power from woody biomass.
 As the market continues to gain momentum, so too has the scrutiny, and forest landowners and the associations that represent their interests have ramped up their advocacy and outreach, working with foreign policymakers to educate them on well-established forestry practices. Scott Jones, executive director of the Forest Landowners Association, and its members are optimistic about this new market.&ldquo;The general feel from our members is excitement. They are excited about the market it provides them to continue to manage their forestlands,&rdquo; he says. Forest Landowners Association membership is largely private, multigenerational families managing a particular tract of land for secondary income, generation after generation. If the pellet industry is to gain a permanent foothold within the sector, its membership&rsquo;s participation is vital.
 &ldquo;The landowners who own the resource are really the lynch pin in this discussion because without them, none of this would happen,&rdquo; say Risher Willard, chief of marketing and utilization at the Georgia Forestry Commission. &ldquo;Without good markets for timber products, people might be inclined to convert that land to other uses. Providing strong growing markets will encourage people to maintain their land as forests.&rdquo;
 This is the message that Jones, Willard and many others across the forest products industry are working to deliver to policy makers, NGOs and the general public. While the pellet market is new and emerging, the system that will supply is well-established and by all measures, in balance. Secondary Market Roles
 Forests generate revenue by serving a small handful of markets.&nbsp; Working, productive forests are all aiming to satisfy the highest value markets first, and every management decision made by a landowner can be attributed to these high-value opportunities. These high-value markets are the sawmills that convert mature pine trees into dimensional lumber. &ldquo;We&rsquo;re growing for the housing market. That&rsquo;s what drives prices. That&rsquo;s what drives financial success on these forestlands is growing that higher value product, that sawtimber, something that is going to make 2 by 4s, something that is going to make 4 by 4 posts,&rdquo; says Jones. Understanding the journey that an acre of trees takes as it is managed to satisfy these markets is vital to understanding how fiber comes to be available to pellet producers and other, less valuable, but no less important, secondary markets.
 Actively managed forestlands engage in a cycle that includes planting, commercial thinning and final harvest. This cycle unfolds over nearly 30 years before the final harvest occurs, when, if a landowner feels it makes financial sense, it all begins again.
 Mike Jostrom, director of renewable resources for the large timber real estate investment company Plum Creek, explains the role commercial thinning plays in forest management. &ldquo;A commercial thinning essentially does what nature does on its own, but it captures the wood fiber for a market,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;With a commercial thinning, the remaining trees are healthier and grow faster. Not only are the individual trees healthier, but the whole stand of trees is more resistant to disease and insects as well as being more resistant to fire. Commercial thinning is a fundamental tool that significantly contributes to sustainable trees management.&rdquo;
 Forest landowners, keen to maximize their forests productivity, know that commercial thinning is vital to the health of their stand. Still, thinning a stand of growing forests is a labor-intensive proposition. &ldquo;When you cut down lots of small trees, it is a very expensive process,&rdquo; Jostrom says. &ldquo;And so if you don&rsquo;t have a market to pay you for doing that, it really makes it difficult to do it.&rdquo;
 Landowners have traditionally relied upon the pulp and paper markets to support these practices. While the pulp and paper market is broadly stable, there are areas where demand is declining. &ldquo;Where those markets are declining or have disappeared, we are now starting to see markets for wood pellets develop,&rdquo; says Jostrom.
 Considering the Competition
 Those opposed to the use of wood fiber for the production of pellets and electric power or heat assert that this demand will place extreme pressures on forest resources and will ultimately result in deforestation. Professionals steeped in forest management and forest economics know otherwise.
 Willard, who closely tracks a growing list of proposed pellet facilities at his office, points to the folly of siting a pellet mill in an area with existing strong demand for wood fiber. &ldquo;These problems don&rsquo;t exist because they (pellet producers) can&rsquo;t afford to hurt themselves by building in an area with a lot of competition. The risk to themselves would be too great,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;Mill siting is probably one of the biggest considerations for these new pellet plants.
 Willard points to an altogether different market dynamic that may negatively impact the size of the commercial forest resource. &ldquo;There are some statistics out there in the southeast, in Georgia too, in some other states where the inventory of small-diameter trees isn&rsquo;t as great as it has been in the past. That can be attributed to the downturn in the housing markets in the mid-2000s. Not as many final harvests have taken place, which is resulting in not as many acres being reforested,&rdquo; he notes.
 Certification Conundrum
 This system of replanting, commercial thinning and final harvest has been governed by state and federal best management practices since the 1980s. Still, recognizing that some consumers wanted more assurance that forests were being sustainably managed, forest owners began to explore and deploy more robust certification programs across the industry. These programs utilize guidelines and third-party audits to guarantee that forests are managed in a sustainable manner.&nbsp;&nbsp; Moreover, these certification programs are serving as the foundation for the supply chain certification programs foreign policy makers are deploying for inbound wood pellets.
 &ldquo;We (Plum Creek) were the first company to become certified on all of our lands, third-party certified, across the country,&rdquo; says Jostrom. Certification, however, introduces new costs for landowners, and smaller landowners are reticent to take on these costs without recovering them from marketplace premiums. &ldquo;If you are providing a product that meets a higher standard, then you should be rewarded for providing that product,&rdquo; says Jones. &ldquo;That conclusion has not been realized in the forest certification marketplace. Yet, in all marketplaces with wood products, whether its saw wood, pulp wood, paper products, or pellets, premiums are not being paid for those certified products when compared to uncertified products. That is what creates some of the reluctance you are seeing from landowners to get certified.&rdquo;
 Recognizing that exclusively utilizing certification schemes will dramatically limit its access to wood fiber in the U.S., the United Kingdom&rsquo;s Department of Energy and Climate Change has introduced a new pathway within its Timber Procurement Policy for fuel suppliers to prove the &ldquo;legality and sustainability&rdquo; of their fuel. This pathway is commonly referred to as Category B. This pathway, while eliminating the requirement for full-on fiber certification still requires significant supply chain and chain-of-custody documentation. This distinction is nuanced, but important, points out Seth Ginther, executive director of the U.S. Industrial Pellet Association. &ldquo;In category B you have other certifications and processes that point to sustainability,&rdquo; he says. For those in the sector, the challenge now is making sure that the requirements are enough to satisfy foreign governments and fuel buyers without introducing a burden to the landowners and pellet producers who stand ready to serve that market. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ll continue to work with DECC and try to influence them to allow the source of the most sustainable biomass in the world to participate in this marketplace and that is the southeastern U.S.,&rdquo; says Jones.
 For Plum Creek, the decision to certify has been made. &ldquo;Certification is very good for a large commercial operation like Plum Creek,&rdquo; says Jostrom. &ldquo;It's a voluntary program so that we can tell our customers that we are doing the right thing. But it is very expensive and we are applying it to multiple age classes every year.&rdquo;
 Plum Creek&rsquo;s decision to certify its lands predated the emergence of the pellet market. Nevertheless, Jostrom and Plum Creek welcome this new market as an important part of an ongoing, sustainable forest management plan. &ldquo;Plum Creek is interested in the emergence of energy markets for our low-quality wood fiber,&rdquo; he adds. &ldquo;The reason is not because we envision that these will become the money crop for management. It is because it has become a tool for sustainable forestry. They allow us to use more of every tree that we harvest. They give us the economic means to thin our lands for forest health and productivity.&rdquo; Author: Tim Portz Executive Editor, Biomass Magazine <a href="mailto:tportz@bbiinternational.com">tportz@bbiinternational.com</a> 701-738-4969

An Adolescent Stand: This 16-year-old stand of timber awaits its first commercial thinning. The stand will be thinned from the original 600 stems that were planted to around 225 individual trees in its first thinning. The canopy produced by this grow

2014/09/Pel-Biomass-bodyOFwork-1014_14108975533209_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/Pel-Biomass-bodyOFwork-1014_14108975533209_thumb.jpg

2014/09/Pel-Biomass-bodyOFwork-1014_14108975533209.jpg

The Cycle Continues: As long as landowners continue to have access to robust and varied markets, history shows that after completing a final harvest on their property, they replant those stands with the knowledge that theyâ€™ll have to wait over a de

2014/09/Pel-Biomass-cyclecontinues-1014_14108975553719.jpg

Superior Survivability: Plum Creekâ€™s Ken McQuage, nursery manager at the companyâ€™s Pearl River site, holds a containerized southern yellow pine seedling. While these seedlings are more labor-intensive to produce, they offer landowners survival ra

2014/09/Pel-Biomass-superiorsurvivability-1014_14108975611179.jpg

Excited by the new market the pellet sector offers for low value fiber, forest landowners work to assure pellet buyers of existing sustainable practices.

A Body of Work

A proposed pellet plant under development near Mission, British Columbia, aims to produce wood pellets for export into industrial markets in South Korea and other Asian markets. The project is being developed by SMG Wood Pellet Inc., a subsidiary of Vancouver, British Columbia-based SMG Asset. The facility will be branded under the name Mission Wood Pellet.
 Paul Adams, operations manager for SMG Wood Pellet, said engineering work on the facility is nearing completion, while fiber supply agreements and offtake agreements are in place. The company is in the process of securing necessary permits.
 SMG plans to break ground on the project early next year with operations beginning in the second or third quarter. Once complete, the facility will have an installed capacity of 160,000 tons per year. Initial production will be in the range of 100,000 tons per year. &ldquo;This is going to be a first-of-its-kind facility in North America,&rdquo; Adams said, noting it will feature state-of-the-art technologies and best practices with regard to fiber handling and processing.

Proposed plant to export pellets to Asian markets

Highland Pellets LLC has announced plans to build a 500,000 metric ton-per-year plant in Pine Bluff, Arkansas. The facility&rsquo;s fiber supply is fully contracted for 10 years. Pellets produced at the facility are expected to be exported to Europe.&nbsp;
 Marshall Chapin, chief operating officer with Highland, said the company chose the location because of the availability of resources. &ldquo;The Pine Bluff area has an abundant and sustainable fiber basket, which can reliably support our fiber needs, and it has both rail and barge access for redundancy of logistics,&rdquo; he said.
 Although off-take agreements and feedstock partners are still confidential, the company said it is working with industry partners including a leading forestry company to provide sustainable fiber feedstock and Cooper/Consolidated for management of the logistics supply chain for export. Groundbreaking was expected to begin in October with pellet production in March 2016.

2014/09/October-2014-BMM-18_14108980610974.jpg

Highland plans Arkansas project

When visiting the picturesque site of Eagle Valley Clean Energy, one might confuse the rolling, cattle-littered landscape with a farming operation.
Right on the edge of the ski town Gypsum, Colorado, the plant serves to preserve the beauty of the what the USDA Forest Service refers to as the &ldquo;crown jewel&rdquo; of our nation&rsquo;s public land system, the White River National Forest. Triggered by numerous circumstances including aging forests, warmer winters and extended drought, the western pine beetle has devoured millions of acres of Colorado&rsquo;s forests, prompting a desperate need for removal of dead, dying and falling trees. Via a 10-year contract with the forest service, Eagle Valley Clean Energy is doing just that, while spurring numerous other positive impacts.
 Partners Dean Rostrom and Kendrick Wait, with backgrounds in Wall Street and engineering, respectively, were working independently on renewable energy projects before partnering up to submit a response to a request for proposal (RFP) from Holy Cross Energy, the local utility in western Colorado that serves the mountain and ski resort regions. &ldquo;Consumers had voted and responded to a questionnaire with a resounding yes to renewable energy,&rdquo; explains Rostrom. &ldquo;As a result, Holy Cross put out an RFP for which we understand about 50 different proposals came in. They narrowed the list and finally decided on our proposal.&rdquo;
 Rostrom believes the advantage that set his and Wait&rsquo;s proposal apart from the other types of renewables are the benefits that wind and solar don&rsquo;t offer&mdash;the standard non-intermittency that biomass provides, but also forest health. &ldquo;That was huge, because of the mountain pine beetle epidemic that&rsquo;s swept through and devastated millions of acres in Colorado,&rdquo; Rostrom says. &ldquo;That&rsquo;s really the story here&mdash;that this is such a unique, long-term reliable tool for forest health management.&rdquo;
 After the signing of a 20-year power purchase agreement toward the 2011, the project began to gain momentum, but the course to completion wasn&rsquo;t exactly smooth sailing&mdash;navigating the red tape of accessing fuel on federal lands posed a challenge. &ldquo;That gave us some gray hairs,&rdquo; Wait admits. &ldquo;Cutting on federal lands is very difficult.&rdquo;
 The strategy to ease that burden was to bring in a partner who knew the ropes&mdash;a retired deputy forester, who served as a consultant and was able to score the project its forest stewardship contract with the USDA Forest Service. &ldquo;It provides for a certain number of acres every year that we&rsquo;re responsible for treating,&rdquo; Rostrom explains. &ldquo;They tell our logger&mdash;West Range Reclamation&mdash;where to go and how to treat the beetle-kill acres. They get it, chip and bring it to our facility.&rdquo;
 Just recently, the plant was qualified as a conversion facility under the USDA BCAP program. &ldquo;It&rsquo;s a very important project for the forest service, because it enables them to do some logging and forestlands treatment in area that we wouldn&rsquo;t otherwise be able to reach.&rdquo;
 Perhaps the most challenging aspect of the $60 million project was financing, Rostrom says. &ldquo;The market is still closed to anything other than right down the middle of the fairway type financing&mdash;it was very difficult to finance.&rdquo;
 The forest service contract was critical in that case, as well as long-term financing&mdash;a loan guarantee provided by the USDA&mdash;which took a year and a half to square away, on top of a year to secure the forest stewardship agreement. After going to commercial banks for the remaining funds, another year passed. &ldquo;It was several years&rsquo; worth of hard work,&rdquo; Rostrom adds.
 The 11.5-MW plant, which became fully operational last Christmas Day, consumes about 250 dry tons of biomass per day, according to Wait, who adds that beetle kill wood is typically very dry, requiring a boiler design specific for very low-moisture fuel. The partners describe the plant set up as typical&mdash;a standard fuel yard where chipped fuel is brought in, a steam boiler at the heart of the facility and an electrostatic precipitator to control emissions. Water treatment is done out of the Eagle River Basin. &ldquo;The interconnection point is right at the site,&rdquo; Wait adds, &ldquo;so we don&rsquo;t have to send our power miles over a new power line.&rdquo;
 Not your typical biomass power project, Rostrom points out that the operation is a classic, small-family business that&rsquo;s brought jobs and long-time investment to the community. &ldquo;We haven&rsquo;t just put up panels and gone away,&rdquo; he says. &ldquo;The two of our families own this business, and together, we&rsquo;ve pushed it through.&rdquo;
 Other partners in the project include Wellons and Bill Carlson, former Biomass Power Association chairman.
 &nbsp;&ldquo;One of the things we&rsquo;ve been excited and pleased about is we get a lot of calls from local landowners looking for an outlet to dispose of all of their clean woody biomass for free&mdash;people clearing out beetle-killed wood or treating private lands, agreements with landfills to ease clogging there, tree-trimming companies, or, for example, the town of Gypsum expanding a reservoir and had material they needed to dispose of,&rdquo; Rostrom adds. &ldquo;We can take stuff and help clean up the landscape. It&rsquo;s been really great&mdash;good for our industry, good for us because it&rsquo;s cheap fuel, and it&rsquo;s good for the community.&rdquo;
 Author: Anna Simet Managing Editor, Biomass Magazine <a href="mailto:asimet@bbiinternational.com">asimet@bbiinternational.com</a> 701-738-4961

2014/09/Pow-Biomass-EagleValley1-1014_14108982232991_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/Pow-Biomass-EagleValley1-1014_14108982232991_thumb.jpg

2014/09/Pow-Biomass-EagleValley1-1014_14108982232991.jpg

BOTTOMS DOWN: Chipped woody biomass is delivered to Eagle Valley Clean Energyâ€™s fuel yard daily.

2014/09/Pow-Biomass-EagleValley2-1014_14108982293326.jpg

Sustainability is symbiotic when it comes to biomass power plant Eagle Valley Clean Energy and the fuel it uses.


Caretaking Colorado's Crown Jewel

Last month, the Journal of Forestry published a scientific, peer-reviewed study by nine respected scientists and forestry experts confirming the virtues of biomass&mdash;not just as an energy source, but also as an important element for forestry health and atmospheric carbon management.
 The scientists, from USDA Forest Service as well as prominent universities and think tanks, in no uncertain terms, argued for policies that recognize the long-term benefits of biomass power, warning that not doing so could result in the loss of a valuable carbon mitigation tool, stating, &ldquo;The current debate about biomass energy often narrows the discussion to short-term and direct effects of increased use of forest biomass, understating the benefits of using sustainably produced forest-based fuels and materials.&hellip;Carbon accounting frameworks often misrepresent the CO2 impacts of using biomass fuels and put at risk many of the mitigation benefits and opportunities provided by sustainably managed forests and the products that flow from them.&rdquo;
 This study couldn&rsquo;t have come at a better time. Despite the abundant evidence of the environmental benefits of power from biomass, there is still much uncertainty about how our industry will factor into the nation&rsquo;s renewable energy future.
 There have been many encouraging signs from the Obama administration and several of its federal agencies that biomass is a valued energy source and will be an important part of climate change mitigation.
 The National Climate Assessment released in May characterized biomass as &ldquo;one component of an overall bioenergy strategy to reduce emissions of carbon from fossil fuels, while also improving water quality and maintaining lands for timber production as an alternative to other socioeconomic options.&rdquo; Even more promising, the U.S. EPA&rsquo;s Clean Power Plan, released soon after the National Climate Assessment in June, recognized that &ldquo;biomass-derived fuels can play an important role in CO2 emission reduction strategies.&rdquo;
 But all of this won&rsquo;t mean much until the EPA definitively declares how it will measure carbon from biogenic sources. It&rsquo;s a complicated question with what we think is a fairly straightforward answer:
Biomass power produced from wood and organic residues should have a low-carbon value.
 The findings included in the Journal of Forestry report echo this opinion. The authors of the study presented four key findings they recommended be reflected in any biomass policy framework:
 &bull; Substantial long-term carbon mitigation benefits are derived from sustainably managed working forests that provide an ongoing output of biomass to produce materials and fuels to displace more greenhouse gas-intensive alternatives. While the timing of benefits is debated, the fact that these benefits exist is not.
 &bull; The threats to maintaining long-term forest carbon stocks come primarily from pressures to convert land to nonforest uses and from natural disturbances. Research clearly shows that demand for wood results in investments in forestry that help to prevent deforestation and incentivize afforestation.
 &bull; The most effective mitigation measures are those that provide the lowest long-term net cumulative emissions. The benefits of forest-based mitigation activities are sometimes delayed, but any increased emissions are reversible and temporary and are incurred in the interest of limiting cumulative emissions.
 &bull; Proper characterization of the global warming impacts of the mix of forest biomass sources likely to be used for energy shows net emissions of biogenic carbon to be low when including the effects of market-induced investments.
 We look forward to seeing the EPA&rsquo;s final framework on carbon from biogenic sources, which we hope will be released by the end of the year. This set of regulations will have an enormous impact on biomass at a time when renewable energy is poised for considerable growth. Author: Bob Cleaves President and CEO, Biomass Power Association <a href="http://www.biomasspowerassociation.com">www.biomasspowerassociation.com </a> <a href="mailto:bob@biomasspowerassociation.com">bob@biomasspowerassociation.com</a>

2014/09/Pow-Biomass-Cleaves-1013_14108983741414_largethumb.jpg

2014/09/Pow-Biomass-Cleaves-1013_14108983741414_thumb.jpg

2014/09/Pow-Biomass-Cleaves-1013_14108983741414.jpg

Last month, the Journal of Forestry published a scientific, peer-reviewed study confirming the virtues of biomass as an energy source, and an  important element for forestry health and atmospheric carbon management.

Scientific Endorsement of  Biomass's Carbon Benefits

In early 2013, Drax Group plc converted one of its six power generation units to biomass, and has plans to convert at least two additional units. The U.K. government was expected to support the two additional unit conversions through early Contracts for Difference (CfD) under the Final Investment Decision Enabling mechanism.
 In April, the U.K. Department of Energy and Climate Change announced it would award a CfD to only one of those two conversions. Drax appealed the decision and received a favorable ruling from the U.K. High Court. The DECC, however, appealed that decision, and the U.K. Court of Appeal ruled in its favor. In August, Drax announced it would not appeal that decision.
 The company is currently expected to proceed with both biomass conversions.&nbsp; During a recent investor presentation to discuss financial results for the first half of the year, Dorothy Thompson, chief executive of Drax, said the company is confident it will convert at least three of its six units to biomass. The second unit conversion will now likely be supported by the Renewables Obligation.

Drax likely to proceed with 2 additional power unit conversions

Waste Management Inc. recently announced an agreement to sell its waste-to-energy (WTE) business, Wheelabrator Technologies Inc., to an affiliate of Energy Capital Partners for $1.94 billion. The transaction is expected to close during the last two months of the year.
 Wheelabrator owns or operates 17 WTE facilities and four independent power-producing facilities in the U.S. that process more than 7.5 million tons of waste and have a combined electric generating capacity of 853 MW. It also has four ash monofill landfills, three transfer stations and an ongoing development and construction project in the U.K. During 2013, the business generated approximately $845 million in total revenue.
 During a call to discuss WM&rsquo;s second quarter results, David Steiner, president and CEO, explained&nbsp; the WTE business has two distinct components; the tipping fees MW receives on the front end, and the payments for energy on the back end. &ldquo;We did not view the energy payments as strategic,&rdquo; he said. As part of the transaction, Steiner said WM has entered a front end wastes supply agreement to supply feedstock to certain Wheelabrator facilities. As a result, WM will continue to supply waste to several Wheelabrator plants, but will no longer have the volatility of the financial results related to Wheelabrator electricity sale.

2014/09/News-Biomass-Power-1014-02_1410898467519.jpg

Waste Management to sell Wheelabrator

AST adds consultant American Science and Technology has added Jim Lunt to its team as a consultant. He will assist AST in developing aggressive marketing and business strategies. Lunt has served as the head of product development for NatureWorks LLC. Prior to NatureWorks, he pioneered the development and commercialization of TPEs, vulcanized polyolefins, environmentally-friendly phenolic foams, and long glass fiber reinforced thermoplastics. In recognition of his significant contributions to the PLA process, Lunt was awarded the Presidential Green Chemistry Award in 2002.
 Morbark promotes team member Morbark Inc. has promoted Larry Voelker to vice president of engineering and product development. Voelker previously served as director of engineering and was responsible for the planning and implementation of all engineering activities and providing the strategic technical leadership in continuous improvement of equipment and process capability. Prior to joining Morbark, Voelker held positions at QuickSet International, IMM Inc. and AAR Mobility Systems.
 Sapphire Energy appoints new president, CEO Sapphire Energy Inc. has appointed biotechnology veteran James Levine as president, CEO and member of the board of directors. Levine replaces Cynthia &lsquo;CJ&rsquo; Warner, who is stepping down from her post in July. She will remain chairman of the company&rsquo;s board of directors. Levine previously served as president and CEO of Verenium Corp., where he fostered and managed the company&rsquo;s most critical partnerships, including BP, which acquired the company&rsquo;s cellulosic ethanol unit in 2010, as well as DuPont, Royal DSM, Bunge North America, Cargill, Novus International Inc., Colgate-Palmolive Co. and Tate &amp; Lyle PLC, among others. Prior to Verenium, Levine was a managing director in the global energy group at Goldman Sachs &amp; Co.
 Cool Planet adds team leaders to commercial plant project Cool Planet Energy Systems has announced the team that will lead construction and operations of its first commercial plant in the U.S. Randy Tucker will serve as vice president of capital projects, with overall responsibility for directing the project. He is joining the company after more than 25 years in project management and technical leadership roles. Before joining Cool Planet, he served as vice president of IT services for Peabody Energy. Robert Djelveh will serve as vice president of supply chain. He is an internationally recognized leader in supply chain management and procurement, having worked extensively in Europe, North America and Asia. Most recently, he co-led Pricewaterhouse-Cooper&rsquo;s and PRTM&rsquo;s supply chain and energy groups in China. Rex Downen will serve as construction manager on-site at the facility in Alexandria, Louisiana. He brings more than 30 years of experience as a project manager and site construction manager in the oil and gas, petrochemical and power generation industries. He has managed refinery construction and other large-scale projects for ConocoPhillips and others. Tim Palculict will serve as plant manager, with responsibility for plant operability, bringing the plant online and leading the plant&rsquo;s operations. Palculict has more than 25 years of experience in plant management, having started up 12 plants in the fuel and petrochemical industries. He began his career with Mobil and has managed plant operations for a number of companies.
 PFI announces new chairman, board members Darryl Rose, senior vice president of marketing for Energex Pellet Corp., has been elected chairman of the board of the Pellet Fuels Institute for 2014-&rsquo;15. He has served two terms on the PFI board and as a member of the membership, standards and conference committees. Stephen Faehner of American Wood Fibers will serve as vice chairman, and John Utter of Lignetics Inc. will serve as secretary/treasurer. Scott Jacobs of AgriRecyle, outgoing chairman, will remain on the executive committee as past chairman. Chris Amey of Rentech, Stan Elliot of Olympus Pellet/Pacific Coast Fiber Fuels, Nathan Smith of Koetter &amp; Smith, and Don Wagener of Appalachian Wood Pellets have been elected as new directors to the board. Those elected to new terms on the board include Troy Jamieson of Somerset Pellet Fuels, Gary Moore of Forest Energy Corp., Darryl Rose of Energex Pellet Corp., Bob Sourek, of Bear Mountain Forest Products, Jeff Thiessen of Dansons/IBL, and Utter.

2014/09/BB-Biomass-Lunt-1014_1410898590658.jpg

2014/09/BB-Biomass-Rose-1014_14108985927662.jpg

2014/09/BB-Biomass-Utter-1014_14108985943424.jpg

2014/09/BB-Biomass-Voelker-1014_14108985973422.jpg

2014/09/BB-Biomass-Faehner-1014_14108986282317.jpg

Business Briefs

If this issue of Biomass Magazine asserts anything, it is that the best stewards of natural resources are the people who own them. Policymakers, activists from non-governmental organizations, industry association executive directors and scientists are likely to argue and haggle and point to various studies for decades to come. While all of that is happening, owners of forested and agricultural lands are making decisions each and every day about how to manage their resource. In this I take great comfort. While debates about sustainability and carbon accounting are likely to spin on and on, landowners will ask themselves a very simple question about new markets and new management approaches: &ldquo;Is this in the best, long term interest of my land?&rdquo;
 In an interview for my feature, &ldquo;A Body of Work,&rdquo; Risher Willard from the Georgia Forestry Commission called forest landowners the &ldquo;lynch pin in this discussion&rdquo; and went on to say that if they felt the growing bioenergy market would be detrimental to their timberland assets, the sector would come to a grinding halt. Willard also echoed a sentiment everyone in forestry has heard before and that is the biggest threat to American forests are dwindling and declining markets for forest products. To outsiders, this may seem counterintuitive. To forest landowners, it is common sense.
 Landowners in the Corn Belt are making similar decisions. In Katie Fletcher&rsquo;s page-39 feature, &ldquo;Sourcing Stover Sustainably,&rdquo; she delves into the logistics of the corn stover that will be required at the two cellulosic ethanol plants coming online in Iowa. The company representatives say all the right things, of course, but the quote that should stand out to anyone reading the piece is from Mike Greenfield, who farms family land near the DuPont facility in Nevada, Iowa, and has made the decision to supply the facility with stover. &ldquo;We&rsquo;ve signed a longer-term contract with them for most of our acres,&rdquo; he says. The list of people directly impacted by any decision Mike makes on his corn acres is pretty short. He did not come to his decision without a thorough investigation of his decision&rsquo;s impact on soil health, soil stability, and yield.
 The ongoing debate about the carbon implications of a transition to biomass-derived energy products should not be discounted, and this issue points to some of the most recent reports and science. Still, for every study, article and blog post asserting what we all know to be true, our opponents will counter with studies, articles and blogs of their own. What our opponents cannot counter is the long-term value and opportunity landowners continue to find in steadily growing bioenergy markets.

October 2014

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

The Future of Pellets

Reflecting on the Future

A Visionary Model for Biogas Projects

Making the Most of Woody Biomass

Scientific Endorsement of Biomass's Carbon Benefits

Stewards of Sustainability

Featured

Sourcing Stover Sustainably

Compressed Potential

A Body of Work

Contributions

Achieving Sustainability Goals

Departments

Caretaking Colorado's Crown Jewel

October 2014.css-7jxktu{position:absolute;bottom:0px;left:0px;right:0px;height:3px;border-radius:3px;background-color:var(--chakra-colors-brandBlack);}

Business Briefs

Business Briefs

Columns

The Future of Pellets

Reflecting on the Future

A Visionary Model for Biogas Projects

Making the Most of Woody Biomass

Scientific Endorsement of Biomass's Carbon Benefits

Stewards of Sustainability

Featured

Sourcing Stover Sustainably

Compressed Potential

A Body of Work

Contributions

Achieving Sustainability Goals

Departments

Caretaking Colorado's Crown Jewel

October 2014