Biomass imports

MrMusician18

blue5000 wrote: »

Last time I looked into it forestry is paying better, is tax free, 100% grant aided for planting, and the thinnings can go for biomass.

Only con is that it is permanent. Farmers that planted miscanthus even had to pay vat on establishment costs.

I think the issue at the moment is due to scale and a lack of market. With these two plants running they will have an insatiable demand for biomass which should hopefully bring scale to the industry.

With scale comes efficiency, so rather than shipping the whole way by road to the station, the farmer might be able to transfer to a Depot where it is taken by train to the power plant. BnM once ran one of the largest industrial railways in Europe so things like that can be done. Biomass looks like it will also be relatively labour intensive keeping some jobs in the rural economy.

Even though they are importing now, farmers should be welcoming the move to biomass. At worst it will have no impact on them, but at best it will provide another market for what they produce. It might also divert some supply out of beef, giving price support for those that stay in.

BorneTobyWilde

Cardboard is wood, why not stop shipping bales of cardboard to the Shy Knees and instead use it here to generate electricity. Every ounce of cardboard is shipped out of Ireland, it's a great biomass. There is also 1000's of tons of waste wood in Ireland, all should be used too, builder off cuts.

Say my name

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Cardboard is wood, why not stop shipping bales of cardboard to the Shy Knees and instead use it here to generate electricity. Every ounce of cardboard is shipped out of Ireland, it's a great biomass. There is also 1000's of tons of waste wood in Ireland, all should be used too, builder off cuts.

I heard a story about an entrepreneurial person who had a brainwave about using waste wood from building sites.
They turned it into wood pellets for heating systems.
What they hadn't figured on was that a lot of timber used in construction now is treated with fire retardants. People bought the wood pellet burners and wood pellets but blamed the burners for not working. :pac:

BorneTobyWilde

Say my name wrote: »

I heard a story about an entrepreneurial person who had a brainwave about using waste wood from building sites.
They turned it into wood pellets for heating systems.
What they hadn't figured on was that a lot of timber used in construction now is treated with fire retardants. People bought the wood pellet burners and wood pellets but blamed the burners for not working. :pac:

Nothing would stop wood from burning in those Biomass Stations. They'd burn ice.

148multi

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

At present the prices being paid for biomass timber will just barely cover harvesting and haulage AFAIK. Europe has loads of timber that can't be brought here due to diseases issues.
The majority of future forestry plantings here are likely to be burned at break even costs at best.

The plan for future harvested timber is to be used in construction and furniture, store the carbon for every more, no burning.

emaherx

_Brian wrote: »

I think it really shows that allot of people banging a drum against farming because of emissions and climate were actually really just extremist vegan groups taking advantage of a few soundbite reports against Ag.

True environmentalists would be horrified at wood coming from Australia while beef/chicken is shipped from Brazil. The environmental impact of this mass transit of goods must be massive. Supporting Irish farmers to produce these products is on a much sounder environmental footing.

This mass transit of goods we already have ye ability to produce should be bringing allot of pressure from true environmentalists on the government to support Irish farming. We need a common sense approach, taking into account emissions from transport, otherwise the whole thing is a total joke.

https://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/climate-change-activists-back-farmers-at-major-rural-protest/

Apparently they are not all farm hating vegans!

Upstream

blue5000 wrote: »

The sad thing is it's probably cheaper and more energy efficient to bring a ton of wood from Australia by ship than it would be for a farmer to transport a load of bales by tractor and trailer 40km to a power plant. AFAIK ships can transport 1 ton/mile for as little as 1c.

Obviously the closer you get to the power plant the more efficient it is, because of no backload. But 40km seems to be the cutoff point for transporting biomass by road.

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~cushman/books/Numbers/Chap5-Transportation.pdf

Shipping is relatively cheap per mile, but it's still roughly 10,000 miles by boat to Australia.
So if ships can transport 1 ton/mile for 1c that still works out at about €100 a ton from there. You'd think that would take away the economic advantage of shipping a commodity from so far away.

marzic

Nekarsulm wrote: »

_Brian wrote: »

I’ve said before.
This is happening because emissions from transport were omitted from the pros accord. If there were a carbon tax in shipping of goods then things would change very quickly.

Only read somewhere on Friday, that aircraft fuel is NOT included in emmissions calculations.
If you included Ryan Air and Aer Lingus fuel burn, I'd say you'd nearly have to euthanize half the population .....

Plus there's no duty on jet fuel, so no benefit to the exchecquer

MrMusician18

Upstream wrote: »

Shipping is relatively cheap per mile, but it's still roughly 10,000 miles by boat to Australia.
So if ships can transport 1 ton/mile for 1c that still works out at about €100 a ton from there. You'd think that would take away the economic advantage of shipping a commodity from so far away.

The obvious reason they're importing it is because there isn't feedstock available here in the quantities required to get started.

However if farmers here only need to be producing miscanthus at €130 or 140/t to be competitive it won't be long until vast swathes of the country are under it.

I can't understand the hostility to it tbh. It looks like the easiest cash crop going with a soon too be massive domestic market. Rather than knocking it, perhaps farmers should be taking tentative steps into organising themselves into growing groups so they would have better leverage to negotiate on price

blue5000

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The obvious reason they're importing it is because there isn't feedstock available here in the quantities required to get started.

How much is needed? An area the size of Kerry planted with miscanthus wouldn't be big enough to supply 10% of Moneypoint's requirements.




However if farmers here only need to be producing miscanthus at €130 or 140/t to be competitive it won't be long until vast swathes of the country are under it.

There's a couple of problems with it; chlorine and it's expensive to plant.

I can't understand the hostility to it tbh. It looks like the easiest cash crop going with a soon to be massive domestic market. Rather than knocking it, perhaps farmers should be taking tentative steps into organising themselves into growing groups so they would have better leverage to negotiate on price


People who planted it 10-15 years ago couldn't give it away, never mind sell it. It will need a substantial govt. led programme to get it off the ground this time, I'm talking 100% grant aid for establishment and a guaranteed market. It needs good land to produce a decent crop, unlike sitka which grows well on marginal land.

MrMusician18

blue5000 wrote: »

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The obvious reason they're importing it is because there isn't feedstock available here in the quantities required to get started.

How much is needed? An area the size of Kerry planted with miscanthus wouldn't be big enough to supply 10% of Moneypoint's requirements.





However if farmers here only need to be producing miscanthus at €130 or 140/t to be competitive it won't be long until vast swathes of the country are under it.

There's a couple of problems with it; chlorine and it's expensive to plant.

I can't understand the hostility to it tbh. It looks like the easiest cash crop going with a soon to be massive domestic market. Rather than knocking it, perhaps farmers should be taking tentative steps into organising themselves into growing groups so they would have better leverage to negotiate on price


People who planted it 10-15 years ago couldn't give it away, never mind sell it. It will need a substantial govt. led programme to get it off the ground this time, I'm talking 100% grant aid for establishment and a guaranteed market. It needs good land to produce a decent crop, unlike sitka which grows well on marginal land.

They're not planning on replacing Moneypoint with a biomass plant, only Lanesboro and Edenderry. The demand is 3000t/day so these two plants would require an area 2/3 the size of Longford to meet demand. A huge area but to be honest, the majority of Longford/Roscommon/Leitrim is either under forestry or unsustainable small suckler farms.

Fair enough about farmers being burned by biomass before, but this project is could to create an insatiable demand for it here. Once the market is established and paying a good price I would see little reason why further incentives are needed beyond the SFP. The importation is the first part of establishing the market and farmers should see that there is a clear first mover advantage to be won should these stations get planning.

yosemitesam1

MrMusician18 wrote: »

The obvious reason they're importing it is because there isn't feedstock available here in the quantities required to get started.

However if farmers here only need to be producing miscanthus at €130 or 140/t to be competitive it won't be long until vast swathes of the country are under it.

I can't understand the hostility to it tbh. It looks like the easiest cash crop going with a soon too be massive domestic market. Rather than knocking it, perhaps farmers should be taking tentative steps into organising themselves into growing groups so they would have better leverage to negotiate on price

Where is that ,€130/t coming from? It would be costing under €30/t for transport from aus, they can probably get it here for a similar enough price for local timber which is just breaking even for the grower between harvest+transport.

MrMusician18

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Where is that ,€130/t coming from? It would be costing under €30/t for transport from aus, they can probably get it here for a similar enough price for local timber which is just breaking even for the grower between harvest+transport.

I had been referencing another poster above who said that the cost of slow boat would be about 1c/t/mi. From a little research bulk shipping is about half that. So let's do a little calculation: Given that after it is delivered to Ireland, it has to be trucked from Foynes we can ignore the land transport costs of the farmer as we will consider both similar (even though Foynes is well outside the 40km radius from Lanesboro or Edenderry)

According to the farmers experienced with miscanthusin Ireland on agriland, it takes 100l diesel to harvest an acre of miscanthus, which would have a median yield of 5t dm/acre. The price assuming 70c/l for agri diesel would give a cost to harvest of €350/acre Or €70/t. BnM would have to be buying bulk biomass from Australia at less than €20/t to be more competitive than that domestically produced.

Irish farmers can definitely compete here and this is a real opportunity for many unviable farms to become viable again if this project goes ahead.

ganmo

MrMusician18 wrote: »

Irish farmers can definitely compete here and this is a real opportunity for many unviable farms to become viable again if this project goes ahead.

Were they given the opportunity to to compete?

Good loser

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I had been referencing another poster above who said that the cost of slow boat would be about 1c/t/mi. From a little research bulk shipping is about half that. So let's do a little calculation: Given that after it is delivered to Ireland, it has to be trucked from Foynes we can ignore the land transport costs of the farmer as we will consider both similar (even though Foynes is well outside the 40km radius from Lanesboro or Edenderry)

According to the farmers experienced with miscanthusin Ireland on agriland, it takes 100l diesel to harvest an acre of miscanthus, which would have a median yield of 5t dm/acre. The price assuming 70c/l for agri diesel would give a cost to harvest of €350/acre Or €70/t. BnM would have to be buying bulk biomass from Australia at less than €20/t to be more competitive than that domestically produced.

Irish farmers can definitely compete here and this is a real opportunity for many unviable farms to become viable again if this project goes ahead.

You don't really know much about miscanthus do you?

Just today I was told about a farm that had 120+ acres of top quality land in miscanthus for 10/12 years, all of it now pulled out - it took a serious amount of harrowing to get it out and rogue plants are continuing to grow in the grassland that replaced it.

The break even price for selling it was €64 per tonne and the best price that could be achieved was €46 per tonne.

Nobody wanted it. Some went to Edenderry until the boiler(s) was replaced; the new boilers would not be covered for insurance if ANY miscanthus was used as a fuel source. The chlorine or something (apparently) destroyed the lining of the combustion chamber.

The farm owner above had 3/4 years of it stockpiled in the end; some of it was
used for animal bedding but it was an inferior product worth about €8 per bale; it was hard on the baler too, spiky and brittle.

Only a fool would plant miscanthus.

Reggie.

Good loser wrote: »

You don't really know much about miscanthus do you?

Just today I was told about a farm that had 120+ acres of top quality land in miscanthus for 10/12 years, all of it now pulled out - it took a serious amount of harrowing to get it out and rogue plants are continuing to grow in the grassland that replaced it.

The break even price for selling it was €64 per tonne and the best price that could be achieved was €46 per tonne.

Nobody wanted it. Some went to Edenderry until the boiler(s) was replaced; the new boilers would not be covered for insurance if ANY miscanthus was used as a fuel source. The chlorine or something (apparently) destroyed the lining of the combustion chamber.

The farm owner above had 3/4 years of it stockpiled in the end; some of it was
used for animal bedding but it was an inferior product worth about €8 per bale; it was hard on the baler too, spiky and brittle.

Only a fool would plant miscanthus.

And every other country is investing in it and the government here are more worried about electric cars

yosemitesam1

MrMusician18 wrote: »

I had been referencing another poster above who said that the cost of slow boat would be about 1c/t/mi. From a little research bulk shipping is about half that. So let's do a little calculation: Given that after it is delivered to Ireland, it has to be trucked from Foynes we can ignore the land transport costs of the farmer as we will consider both similar (even though Foynes is well outside the 40km radius from Lanesboro or Edenderry)

According to the farmers experienced with miscanthusin Ireland on agriland, it takes 100l diesel to harvest an acre of miscanthus, which would have a median yield of 5t dm/acre. The price assuming 70c/l for agri diesel would give a cost to harvest of €350/acre Or €70/t. BnM would have to be buying bulk biomass from Australia at less than €20/t to be more competitive than that domestically produced.

Irish farmers can definitely compete here and this is a real opportunity for many unviable farms to become viable again if this project goes ahead.

By the time you allow for planting, land costs etc, the potential profit doesn't be long disappearing. Can't see why so much effort has been put into miscanthus, it has so many barriers to actually ever becoming a viable option.
Encouraging low input straw production would have more potential and would produce grain as a byproduct.

Markcheese

Reggie. wrote: »

And every other country is investing in it and the government here are more worried about electric cars

Like anything else, gotta plant the right thing in the right place,( and at the right time market wise) Miscantus ain't it.
Willow sounds great, but establishment costs are agaín high, ideally you'd harvest in winter.. But ground conditions mightn't suit,
Socially you'd want it in western and North Western areas, but large tillage fields are rarer there...

MrMusician18

Good loser wrote: »

You don't really know much about miscanthus do you?

Just today I was told about a farm that had 120+ acres of top quality land in miscanthus for 10/12 years, all of it now pulled out - it took a serious amount of harrowing to get it out and rogue plants are continuing to grow in the grassland that replaced it.

The break even price for selling it was €64 per tonne and the best price that could be achieved was €46 per tonne.

Nobody wanted it. Some went to Edenderry until the boiler(s) was replaced; the new boilers would not be covered for insurance if ANY miscanthus was used as a fuel source. The chlorine or something (apparently) destroyed the lining of the combustion chamber.

The farm owner above had 3/4 years of it stockpiled in the end; some of it was
used for animal bedding but it was an inferior product worth about €8 per bale; it was hard on the baler too, spiky and brittle.

Only a fool would plant miscanthus.

I'd agree, but only when there is no market. Lanesboro and West Offaly are being converted to burn this stuff so there should be no issue with the boilers, and it will be a licensing requirement to use biomass as a feedstock so there will be a market. Since it won't be competing with cheaper peat (hence the low price of €46/t) the price of peat won't be the price floor, but the cost of imported biomass. I've already illustrated that domestic producers have €50/t headroom over import due to shipping costs to stay competitive.

I'm not saying that farmers must grow it, but there clearly is an opportunity here as a new source of domestic demand could potentially come on stream. It definitely offers an opportunity for diversification and farmers should be looking for a way in rather that knocking the project.


And no one is forcing farmers to take this opportunity, they are free to continue losing money raising sucklers is they wish.

Water John

Miscanthus is a rhizome so very difficult to get rid of it. Any length left in the soil will regrow.
The hard lesson for all those who were the early adoptors of all the bio technologies is, unless a secure long term market is guaranteed to be available, don't go there.
If the Govn't want it, let them back it. Lets see if there real about their Cl Ac Pl.
Some sectors are already unhappy at having been largely written out of being a contribution to the mix of solutions.

blue5000

Another stumbling block with it before, was that Edenderry wanted it chopped up for them as well as delivered. Problem with that is it's easier to deliver big square bales than loose, chopped miscanthus. They wanted someone else to chop it on site after delivery.

Is this Australian wood chipped before shipping?

Odelay

blue5000 wrote: »

Another stumbling block with it before, was that Edenderry wanted it chopped up for them as well as delivered. Problem with that is it's easier to deliver big square bales than loose, chopped miscanthus. They wanted someone else to chop it on site after delivery.

Is this Australian wood chipped before shipping?

Yes, it’s arriving in bulk bags.

YFlyer

foxy farmer wrote: »

Is there any miscanthus growing now? I draw silage bales off 3 fields that were growing miscanthus for last 10 yrs. No one here can remember it ever being cut once.

The miscanthus was too acidic for the peat burning plant.

my3cents

YFlyer wrote: »

The miscanthus was too acidic for the peat burning plant.

I'll take your word for it but how can anything be more acidic than peat?

YFlyer

my3cents wrote: »

I'll take your word for it but how can anything be more acidic than peat?

The high chlorine content along with the alkali metals in the miscanthus causing salts to form.

Aravo

my3cents wrote:

I'll take your word for it but how can anything be more acidic than peat?

Plenty of high moisture peat got a good dose of diesel to help it on its way in life at the power stations. One would be surprised at how much is spent on diesel at the plants.

tabby aspreme

Both miscantus and willow, growing here in south kildare , Farrellys from Carnaross harvest both in March each year, don't know where it's going to.

What price would biomass need to be, to make the branches and brash left from sitka clear fell, viable to collect.

gozunda

Reggie. wrote: »

And every other country is investing in it and the government here are more worried about electric cars

And of those falling over themselves to buy EV cars fueled by electricity - the bulk of which is sourced from fossil fuels...

It doesn't matter that the slow boat from Australia costs feck all - the transport of this type of biomass still requires billions of tons of fossil fuel for transport alone ...

I love the eejits flagitlating themselves over the idea of 'environmentally friendly' biomas ...

Water John

AFAIK there is beet from as far south as Carlow going to NI, not to be fed to livestock.

We, like most EV owners charge by night, largely from renewables.

gozunda

Water John wrote: »

...

We, like most EV owners charge by night, largely from renewables.

Unfortunately - that is little better than a myth tbh. It is impossible to separate renewables from fossil fuel on the current grid system. Fossil fuel sources dont suddenly get turned off at 9.00 pm or whenever. Plus people avail of free daytime charging for their electical vehicles. Sure why wouldn't they? There's no charge. However those that dont use it must also subsidise it - whether they would want to or otherwise.