skip to main content
DOE PAGES title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Biomass Production a Stronger Driver of Cellulosic Ethanol Yield than Biomass Quality

Abstract

Many crops have been proposed as feedstocks for the emerging cellulosic ethanol industry, but information is lacking about the relative importance of feedstock production and quality. We compared yield and sugar content for seven bioenergy cropping systems in south-central Wisconsin (ARL) and southwestern Michigan (KBS) during three growing seasons (2012 through 2014). The cropping systems were (i) continuous corn stover (Zea mays L.), (ii) switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.), (iii) giant miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus Greef & Deuter ex Hodkinson & Renvoize), (iv) hybrid poplar (Populus nigra × P. maximowiczii A. Henry ‘NM6’), (v) native grass mix, (vi) early successional community, and (vii) restored prairie. A high-throughput pretreatment and fermentation assay showed corn stover with the highest sugar content (213 g glucose kg –1 [Glc] and 115 g xylose kg–1 [Xyl]) followed by the two monoculture perennial grass treatments (154 [Glc] and 88 [Xyl]) and then the herbaceous polycultures (135 [Glc] and 77 [Xyl]). Biomass production and sugar content were combined to calculate ethanol yields. Miscanthus had the highest per hectare ethanol yields (1957 l ha –1 yr –1 ARL, 2485 l ha –1 yr –1 KBS) followed by switchgrass (1091 l ha –1 yr –1 ARL, 1017 l ha –1more » yr –1 KBS) and corn stover (1121 l ha –1 yr –1 ARL, 878 l ha –1 yr –1 KBS). Perennial grass cropping systems (i.e., switchgrass and miscanthus) had higher per hectare ethanol yields at both sites relative to diverse systems that included dicots. Despite feedstock differences in fermentable sugars, biomass production was the strongest driver of per hectare ethanol yield.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [1];  [2];  [1];  [1];  [1];  [1]
  1. Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI (United States); Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, WI (United States)
  2. Michigan State Univ., East Lansing, MI (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Univ. of Wisconsin, Madison, WI (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
National Science Foundation (NSF); USDOE Office of Science (SC), Biological and Environmental Research (BER) (SC-23); USDOE Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE)
OSTI Identifier:
1418642
Grant/Contract Number:  
FC02-07ER64494; AC05-76RL01830
Resource Type:
Accepted Manuscript
Journal Name:
Agronomy Journal
Additional Journal Information:
Journal Volume: 109; Journal Issue: 5; Journal ID: ISSN 0002-1962
Publisher:
Alliance of Crop, Soil, and Environmental Science Societies
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
09 BIOMASS FUELS

Citation Formats

Sanford, Gregg R., Oates, Lawrence G., Roley, Sarah S., Duncan, David S., Jackson, Randall D., Robertson, G. Philip, and Thelen, Kurt D. Biomass Production a Stronger Driver of Cellulosic Ethanol Yield than Biomass Quality. United States: N. p., 2017. Web. doi:10.2134/agronj2016.08.0454.
Sanford, Gregg R., Oates, Lawrence G., Roley, Sarah S., Duncan, David S., Jackson, Randall D., Robertson, G. Philip, & Thelen, Kurt D. Biomass Production a Stronger Driver of Cellulosic Ethanol Yield than Biomass Quality. United States. doi:10.2134/agronj2016.08.0454.
Sanford, Gregg R., Oates, Lawrence G., Roley, Sarah S., Duncan, David S., Jackson, Randall D., Robertson, G. Philip, and Thelen, Kurt D. Thu . "Biomass Production a Stronger Driver of Cellulosic Ethanol Yield than Biomass Quality". United States. doi:10.2134/agronj2016.08.0454. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1418642.
@article{osti_1418642,
title = {Biomass Production a Stronger Driver of Cellulosic Ethanol Yield than Biomass Quality},
author = {Sanford, Gregg R. and Oates, Lawrence G. and Roley, Sarah S. and Duncan, David S. and Jackson, Randall D. and Robertson, G. Philip and Thelen, Kurt D.},
abstractNote = {Many crops have been proposed as feedstocks for the emerging cellulosic ethanol industry, but information is lacking about the relative importance of feedstock production and quality. We compared yield and sugar content for seven bioenergy cropping systems in south-central Wisconsin (ARL) and southwestern Michigan (KBS) during three growing seasons (2012 through 2014). The cropping systems were (i) continuous corn stover (Zea mays L.), (ii) switchgrass (Panicum virgatum L.), (iii) giant miscanthus (Miscanthus × giganteus Greef & Deuter ex Hodkinson & Renvoize), (iv) hybrid poplar (Populus nigra × P. maximowiczii A. Henry ‘NM6’), (v) native grass mix, (vi) early successional community, and (vii) restored prairie. A high-throughput pretreatment and fermentation assay showed corn stover with the highest sugar content (213 g glucose kg–1 [Glc] and 115 g xylose kg–1 [Xyl]) followed by the two monoculture perennial grass treatments (154 [Glc] and 88 [Xyl]) and then the herbaceous polycultures (135 [Glc] and 77 [Xyl]). Biomass production and sugar content were combined to calculate ethanol yields. Miscanthus had the highest per hectare ethanol yields (1957 l ha–1 yr–1 ARL, 2485 l ha–1 yr–1 KBS) followed by switchgrass (1091 l ha–1 yr–1 ARL, 1017 l ha–1 yr–1 KBS) and corn stover (1121 l ha–1 yr–1 ARL, 878 l ha–1 yr–1 KBS). Perennial grass cropping systems (i.e., switchgrass and miscanthus) had higher per hectare ethanol yields at both sites relative to diverse systems that included dicots. Despite feedstock differences in fermentable sugars, biomass production was the strongest driver of per hectare ethanol yield.},
doi = {10.2134/agronj2016.08.0454},
journal = {Agronomy Journal},
number = 5,
volume = 109,
place = {United States},
year = {2017},
month = {6}
}

Journal Article:
Free Publicly Available Full Text
Publisher's Version of Record

Citation Metrics:
Cited by: 7 works
Citation information provided by
Web of Science

Figures / Tables:

Figure 1 Figure 1: (A, B) Annual [Glc], (C, D) [Xyl], (E, F) [EtOH], (G,H) biomass production, and (I,J) ethanol yields at ARL and KBS, respectively. Lowercase letters indicate significant differences between years within system and site (p < 0.05), while uppercase letters indicate cropping system differences within a site across yearsmore » (p < 0.05).« less

Save / Share:
Figures/Tables have been extracted from DOE-funded journal article accepted manuscripts.