Breakeven price of biomass from switchgrass, big bluestem, and Indiangrass in a dual-purpose production system in Tennessee

被引:6
作者
Boyer, Christopher N. [1 ]
Griffith, Andrew P. [1 ]
McIntosh, David W. [2 ]
Bates, Gary E. [2 ]
Keyser, Patrick D. [3 ]
English, Burton C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tennessee, Dept Agr & Resource Econ, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA
[2] Univ Tennessee, Dept Plant Sci, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA
[3] Univ Tennessee, Dept Forestry Wildlife & Fisheries, Knoxville, TN 37996 USA
关键词
Andropogon gerardii V; Economics; Mixed models; Panicum virgatum L; Sorghastrum nutans L. Nash; Tennessee; MAXIMIZING NITROGEN RATES; WARM-SEASON GRASSES; UNITED-STATES; BIOENERGY; YIELD; HARVEST; ETHANOL; FERTILIZATION; PROFITABILITY; MONOCULTURES;
D O I
10.1016/j.biombioe.2015.10.006
中图分类号
S2 [农业工程];
学科分类号
0828 ;
摘要
The objective was to determine the breakeven price for switchgrass (SG) (Panicum virgatum L.), a mix of big bluestem (Andropogon gerardii Vitman) and Indiangrass (BBIG) (Sorghastrum nutans L. Nash), and a combination of SG and BBIG (SG/BBIG) produced under three harvest treatments. Two-harvest treatments included a forage harvest at early boot (EB) and at early seedhead (ESH) plus a biomass harvest at fall dormancy (FD). The third harvest treatment was a single biomass harvest at FD. Mixed models were used to determine if there were differences in yield, crude protein, and nutrient removal for each of the native warm-season grass (NWSG) treatments at each harvest. The EB plus FD harvest system would be preferred over the ESH plus FD harvest system for all NWSG treatments. BBIG was the only NWSG treatment with a breakeven price for biomass that decreased with an EB harvest. For all three NWSG treatments, a producer would be better off harvesting once a year for biomass than twice for forage and biomass. The cost of harvesting and replacing the nutrients for the forage harvest was greater than the revenue received from selling the forage. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:284 / 289
页数:6
相关论文
共 46 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2007, ORNLTM2007109
  • [2] Switchgrass, Bermudagrass, Flaccidgrass, and Lovegrass biomass yield response to nitrogen for single and double harvest
    Aravindhakshan, Sijesh C.
    Epplin, Francis M.
    Taliaferro, Charles M.
    [J]. BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 2011, 35 (01) : 308 - 319
  • [3] Blank SC, 2001, J AGR RESOUR ECON, V26, P195
  • [4] Effects of soil type and landscape on yield and profit maximizing nitrogen rates for switchgrass production
    Boyer, Christopher N.
    Roberts, Roland K.
    English, Burton C.
    Tyler, Donald D.
    Larson, James A.
    Mooney, Daniel F.
    [J]. BIOMASS & BIOENERGY, 2013, 48 : 33 - 42
  • [5] Switchgrass Yield Response Functions and Profit-Maximizing Nitrogen Rates on Four Landscapes in Tennessee
    Boyer, Christopher N.
    Tyler, Donald D.
    Roberts, Roland K.
    English, Burton C.
    Larson, James A.
    [J]. AGRONOMY JOURNAL, 2012, 104 (06) : 1579 - 1588
  • [6] Bransby D. I., 2005, Industrial biotechnology, V1, P122, DOI 10.1089/ind.2005.1.122
  • [7] Dicks M. R., 2009, Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, V41, P435
  • [8] English B. C., 2006, Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, V38, P389
  • [9] Challenges to the development of a dedicated energy crop
    Epplin, Francis M.
    Clark, Christopher D.
    Roberts, Roland K.
    Hwang, Seonghuyk
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS, 2007, 89 (05) : 1296 - 1302
  • [10] Land Allocation Effects of the Global Ethanol Surge: Predictions from the International FAPRI Model
    Fabiosa, Jacinto F.
    Beghin, John C.
    Dong, Fengxia
    Elobeid, Amani
    Tokgoz, Simla
    Yu, Tun-Hsiang
    [J]. LAND ECONOMICS, 2010, 86 (04) : 687 - 706