Skip to main content

KDF Search Results

Displaying 1 - 20 of 78

This dataset contains data on agricultural crop and residue production by county in 2041. The agricultural crops in this dataset include barley, corn, cotton, grain sorghum, hay, oats, rice, soybeans, and wheat. The agricultural residues include barley straw, corn stover, oats straw, sorghum stubble, and wheat straw. The dataset was obtained from the database of the BT23 (Davis et al.,2024) for the near-term scenario with biomass market prices of up to $70 per dry ton.

For access to this dataset, please use the contact form and indicate this dataset by name.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Jin Wook Ro , Maggie R. Davis , Chad Hellwinckel

This dataset contains data on forest production. The forestry products in this dataset includes hardwood, softwood, and mixed, and the dataset was obtained from the database of the 2023 Billion-Ton Report (Davis et al., 2024). The intended use is for the Feedstock Production Emissions to Air Model (FPEAM).

If you would also like access to this dataset, please use the "contact" button for a request to our research staff.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Jin Wook Ro , Maggie Davis , Hope Cook

This dataset contains data on agricultural crop and residue production by county from 2022 to 2041. The agricultural crop in this dataset includes barley, biomass sorghum, corn, cotton, energy cane, eucalyptus, grain sorghum, hay, miscanthus, oats, pine, poplar, rice, soybean, switchgrass, wheat, and willow, and the agricultural residue includes barley straw, corn stover, oats straw, sorghum stubble, and wheat straw. The dataset was obtained from the database of the BT23 (Davis et al., 2024) for the mature-market medium scenario with biomass market prices of up to $70 per dry ton.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Jin Wook Ro , Maggie R. Davis , Chad Hellwinckel

This dataset contains harvesting, chipping, and production cost data for forestland production by region and forest harvest system. The dataset supports Biomass from the forested land base analysis in the BT23 (Davis et al., 2024) and subsequent modeling using the Forest Sustainable and Economic Analysis Model (ForSEAM). The cost data was updated by Burton English and is in 2014 dollars and 2021 dollars.

Author(s):
Burton English , Jin Wook Ro , Lixia Lambert , Maggie Davis , Matthew H Langholtz

Hellwinckel, C., D. de la Torre Ugarte, J. L. Field, and M. Langholtz. 2024. “Appendix C. Appendix to Chapter 5: Biomass from Agriculture.” In 2023 Billion‐Ton Report. M. H. Langholtz (Lead). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. doi: 10.23720/BT2023/2316182.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Chad Hellwinckel , Daniel DeLaTorre Ugarte , John L Field , Matthew H Langholtz

Davis, M., L. Lambert, R. Jacobson, D. Rossi, C. Brandeis, J. Fried, B. English, et al. 2024. “Appendix B. Appendix to Chapter 4: Biomass from the Forested Land Base.” In 2023 Billion‐Ton Report. M. H. Langholtz (Lead). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. doi: 10.23720/BT2023/2316181.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Maggie Davis , Lixia Lambert , Ryan Jacobson , David Rossi , Consuelo Brandeis , Burton English , Jeremy Fried

U.S. Department of Energy. 2024. “Chapter 8: Looking Forward and Next Steps.” In 2023 Billion‐Ton Report. M. H. Langholtz (Lead). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. doi: 10.23720/BT2023/2316179.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Matthew H Langholtz

Chapter 7.2 — Coleman, A., K. Davis, J. DeAngelo, T. Saltiel, B. Saenz, L. Miller, K. Champion, E. Harrison, and A. Otwell. 2024. “Chapter 7.2: Macroalgae.” In 2023 Billion‐Ton Report. M. H. Langholtz (Lead). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. doi: 10.23720/BT2023/2316176.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Andre Coleman , Kristen Davis , Julianne DeAngelo , Troy Saltiel , Benjamin Saenz , Lee Miller , Kathleen Champion , Eliza Harrison , Anne Otwell

Davis, M., L. Lambert, R. Jacobson, D. Rossi, C. Brandeis, J. Fried, B. English, et al. 2024. “Chapter 4: Biomass from the Forested Land Base.” In 2023 Billion‐Ton Report. M. H. Langholtz (Lead). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. doi: 10.23720/BT2023/2316170.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Maggie Davis , Lixia Lambert , Ryan Jacobson , David Rossi , Consuelo Brandeis , Jeremy Fried , Burton English , Robert Abt , Karen Abt , Prakash Nepal , Claire O’Dea , Jeffrey Prestemon , Matthew Langholtz

Jacobson, R., and S. Curran. 2024. “Chapter 2: Biomass Currently Used for Energy and Coproducts.” In 2023 Billion‐Ton Report. M. H. Langholtz (Lead). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. doi: 10.23720/BT2023/2316167.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Ryan Jacobson

Langholtz, M. H. 2024. “Chapter 1: Background and Introduction.” In 2023 Billion‐Ton Report. M. H. Langholtz (Lead). Oak Ridge, TN: Oak Ridge National Laboratory. doi: 10.23720/BT2023/2316166.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Matthew H Langholtz

Videos

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Matthew H Langholtz , Maggie Davis , Chad Hellwinckel , Daniel DeLaTorre Ugarte , Rebecca Efroymson , Ryan Jacobson , Anelia Milbrandt , Andre Coleman , Ryan Davis , Keith L. Kline , et al.

Logging and mill residues are currently the largest sources of woody biomass for bioenergy in the US, but short-rotation woody crops (SRWCs) are expected to become a larger contributor to biomass production, primarily on lands marginal for food production. However, there are very few studies on the environmental effects of SRWCs, and most have been conducted at stand rather than at watershed scales.

Organization:
DOE
Author(s):
Natalie A. Griffiths , Benjamin M. Rau , Kellie B. Vache , Gregory Starr , Menberu M. Bitew , Doug P. Aubrey , James A. Martin , Elizabeth Benton , C. Rhett Jackson
Funded from the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Bioenergy Technologies Office.

Corn’s (Zea mays L.) stover is a potential nonfood, herbaceous bioenergy feedstock. A vital aspect of utilizing stover for bioenergy production is to establish sustainable harvest criteria that avoid exacerbating soil erosion or degrading soil organic carbon (SOC) levels. Our goal is to empirically estimate the minimum residue return rate required to sustain SOC levels at numerous locations and to identify which macroscale factors affect empirical estimates.

Author(s):
Jane M. F. Johnson , Jeffrey M. Novak , Gary E. Varvel , Diane E. Stott , Shannon L. Osborne , Douglas L. Karlen , John A. Lamb , John Baker , Paul R. Adler

To prepare for a 2014 launch of commercial scale cellulosic ethanol production from corn/maize (Zea mays L.) stover, POET-DSM near Emmetsburg, IA has been working with farmers, researchers, and equipment dealers through “Project Liberty” on harvest, transportation, and storage logistics of corn stover for the past several years. Our objective was to evaluate seven stover harvest strategies within a 50-ha (125 acres) site on very deep, moderately well to poorly drained Mollisols, developed in calcareous glacial till.

Author(s):
Stuart J. Birrell , Douglas L. Karlen , Adam Wirt

Agricultural residues have been identified as a significant potential resource for bioenergy production, but serious questions remain about the sustainability of harvesting residues. Agricultural residues play an important role in limiting soil erosion from wind and water and in maintaining soil organic carbon. Because of this, multiple factors must be considered when assessing sustainable residue harvest limits.

Author(s):
D. Muth, Jr. , K.M. Bryden

The compatibility of elastomeric materials used in fuel storage and dispensing applications was determined for test fuels
representing neat gasoline and gasoline blends containing 10 and 17 vol.% ethanol, and 16 and 24 vol.% isobutanol. The
actual test fuel chemistries were based on the aggressive formulations described in SAE J1681 for oxygenated gasoline.
Elastomer specimens of fluorocarbon, fluorosilicone, acrylonitrile rubber (NBR), polyurethane, neoprene, styrene

Author(s):
Michael Kass
Funded from the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Bioenergy Technologies Office.

The compatibility of plastic materials used in fuel storage and dispensing applications was determined for test fuels representing gasoline blended with 25 vol.% ethanol and gasoline blended with 16 and 24 vol.% isobutanol. Plastic materials included those used in flexible plastic piping and fiberglass resins. Other commonly used plastic materials were also evaluated. The plastic specimens were exposed to Fuel C, CE25a, CiBu16a, and CiBu24a for 16 weeks at 60oC.

Author(s):
Michael Kass
Funded from the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Bioenergy Technologies Office.