[Carpenter Prairie Discussion] biomass & energy
Mervin Wallace
mowldflrs at socket.net
Thu Dec 24 22:35:02 CST 2009
Please correct me if I am wrong, but approximately 43 years ago I
learned in college chemistry class that more energy is required to
distill ethanon than is gotten out of the final product. (We talked
about perpetual motion devices at the same time).
I assume that process has not changed, and ethanol production in most
situations is relying on fossil fuel to heat the mash.
If distilation of alcohol could be accomplished using the spent steam
from steam generating plants (coal gas and NUKE), it seems the ethanol
manufacturers could hold their heads much higher in this greening world.
Boiling point of alcohol: 78.5 deg. C
Steam temp: 100+ deg. C
A place to learn more is through the article by Kelley E Jones,
referenced below:
BT - Direct Injection of Steam for MashTemperature Control
I recall doing a pilot-scale experiment on the use ofsteam for
temperature control as part of a laboratory course in my chemical …
brewingtechniques.com/library/b... -
Mervin Wallace
Missouri Wildflowers Nursery
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 21, 2009, at 2:06 PM, Rudi Roeslein <RRoeslein at ROESLEIN.com>
wrote:
> Thank you all for your professional and very well thought out and
> varied input on this matter. I am the CEO of a company www.roeslein.com
> that has actually been involved in the ethanol industry for a
> number of years and in fact just completed two very large corn based
> projects for EBenX/Abengoa, in Illinois and in Indiana. We have also
> worked with BlueFire on their Lancaster California proposed project
> for several years. We have also been instrumental in taking modular
> processes to over 40 different countries in the past 20 years using
> a modular approach that uses American Technology, but more
> importantly our labor to produce and manufacture over 60 % of the
> labor that would normally be stick built in these foreign
> countries. All of these processes were proven and commercially
> viable, and they had a track record of success in the US before we
> took them overseas.
>
>
>
> The facts regarding the bio fuel industry and which technology will
> actually prove to be commercially viable are still evolving and
> unproven commercially. There are several technologies that have
> been proven to work in both laboratory scales and even with
> demonstration scales. It is however a huge leap commercially and
> technologically to scale these units up to a commercially viable
> production facility. It will take companies with a proven track
> record of success in related industries and that have the financial
> staying power to weather the financial droughts to be successful in
> this arena. I have spent the last three years studying this
> industry in order to make sound and well informed decisions on which
> process company we should engage our modular services with the
> expectation of provide long term modular engineering and
> manufacturing services.
>
> I have also visited the University of Minnesota and met with Dr.
> David Tilman and Dr. Clarence Lehman to discuss their views on this
> subject and to visit their research farm where they are growing
> various grasses and conducting a variety of tests. I have also met
> with Dr. Peter Raven, the Director of the Missouri Botanical garden
> regarding the biodiversity of plants and animals and how various
> countries like China are dealing with their industrialization and
> the environment. I have read countless magazines, articles,
> publications and must profess I still do not pretend to be “smarter
> than a fifth grader”. These efforts were all towards making a sound
> decision as to the right decision on feedstock materials.
>
>
>
> I have traveled extensively to China since 1982, and have witnessed
> firsthand the growth of industry, infrastructure, and the shift from
> fairly low energy means of transportation such as bicycles, motor
> scooters, trains, buses, and just plain foot power to a highly
> mechanized motorcade of cars and other combustion engines. Because
> Dr. Raven has worked with many different countries and especially
> China we discussed the biodiversity of plants along the more
> industrialized eastern sections of the country and shared the same
> view. It is an ecological travesty and a disaster. The rivers are
> extremely polluted, the natural resources are exploited to the
> breaking point and in a lot of cities the air quality is
> deplorable. What does that have to do with this subject? I believe
> it has to do with the fact that China is a window into the future of
> any developing nation dealing with a very high demand on all of its
> resources because of population explosions. When I immigrated to
> the US in 1956 there were 150 million people. Today there are over
> 300 million people. The burgeoning demands on all of our resources
> will continue to grow and it scares the hell out of me to think that
> China is an example of what could happen here. I am sure there are
> a few right now saying that can’t happen, but in just the last 20 ye
> ars of my travelling back and forth from St. Louis to my central Mis
> souri farm in Osage County I have seen a tremendous amount of growth
> and development that has continued to gobble up prime farm real est
> ate and wildlife habitat. I have travelled all over the US and seen
> the same explosion.
>
>
>
> I truly believe that Missouri needs a comprehensive energy, land,
> water, and resource utilization plan that inventories what we have
> today and how we best intend to utilize those resources in the
> future, as well as position Missouri to attract the leading process
> providers in this industry.. Dr. Clarence Lehman and some of his
> colleagues at the University of Minnesota prepared a very
> comprehensive feasibility study for the White Horse Indian
> reservation, that “presents a detailed analysis of the economic and
> technical feasibility of utilizing existing biomass resources on the
> White Horse Reservation to develop a renewable energy biofuels demo
> nstration facility. It also considers the possibility of developing
> , harvesting and marketing native prairie plants and seeds for bioen
> ergy production.” I am copying Dr Lehman on this email since he was
> kind enough to provide me with a copy of this extremely professiona
> l and well done study. I am sharing the executive summary with this
> group since I believe it is imperative that the policy makers and t
> he decision makers of this state become well informed regarding this
> important subject. There will be many companies and people purport
> ed to have the solutions and answers for this hot and politically ch
> arges subject. I believe the State of Missouri should do a similar
> study before deciding how and where to spend the money that is going
> to be expended for this exciting new industry. We have an opportun
> ity to get it right and combine our industrial efforts and economic
> stimulus with environmental and conservation causes that are scienti
> fically sound and environmentally sustainable. I believe the 20 yea
> rs that Dr. Tilman and other renowned scientists have studied the be
> nefits of a diverse and varied planting has convinced me the sustai
> nable way of taking this industry is thru the use of our prairie pla
> nting and the many benefits derived from this once abundant and bene
> ficial eco system. I am working with the process providers to convi
> nce them to develop their processes to be able to fully utilize thes
> e resources. It is up to the assigned representatives of Missouri t
> o come up with a plan to attract investment. The planting of grassla
> nds is an essential part of the needs of this industry, and needs t
> o be a very high priority or we will be left out of the mainstream m
> ovement. If you don’t have the supply of biomass material the proce
> ss providers will not come. I believe such a study would certainly
> be a good first step in the right direction. If Dr. Lehman approves
> the idea I will send interested parties a full copy of this report
> , or would be happy to meet with them to review the entire report.”
> This study evaluated the conversion platforms ranging from the simpl
> e to the complex with the common goal of converting renewable biomas
> s to some useful form of energy that is called biofuel.”
>
>
>
> The question to be answered by the study are:
>
> 1.How do the various conversion platforms differ?
>
> 2.How does plant scale affect economic performance?
>
> 3.What are capital costs and return on investment for the platforms?
>
> 4.What is the financial impact of biomass cost and rack prices of
> ethanol and gasoline?
>
> 5. How much biomass is required for different platforms?
>
>
>
> I have purchased 1100 acres of land in Putnam county and will be
> converting the marginal agricultural land to native prairie
> plantings and am currently working with the MDC, PLM John Murphy to
> provide an example of what can be done with WSG plantings and have
> at least 300 to 500 acres of prairie plantings available for our
> process providers by the time they are ready to take their process
> commercial. This is obviously a drop in the bucket since it will
> take over four hundred thousands acres to support a single 50 mm
> gallon economically viable plant, and as has been pointed out within
> a economical viable range of that plant. I am taking the prairie
> planting route since it provides so many environmental benefits that
> are lacking in monolithic plantings of most other alternatives.
> Since this farm is located near an area that once supported prairie
> chickens I am hoping an added befit will be to provide the wildlife
> friendly grasses and forbs necessary to the survival of this
> diminishing species.
>
>
>
> In addition, Dr. Tilman’s studies have repeatedly demonstrated these
> benefits to be to sequester CO2, filter the water, as well as reple
> nish the ground water table, prevent soil erosion, provide innumerab
> le wildlife habitat benefits, and provide the insects and forage tha
> t most cool season grasses, especially fescue is lacking. Even if B
> iofuel develops in a different direction or not at all these biodive
> rse plantings in native prairie are a sound investment in our envir
> onment and our wildlife conservation program.. The very biodiversit
> y that makes them a challenge will bring out the best in our technol
> ogical superiority, and our ingenuity. We did to go to the moon wit
> hout overcoming challenges and developing new products and technolo
> gy. No, I believe if we had not gone to the moon many of the new sc
> ientific break thru in computer technology, propellants and untold
> other new inventions that would not be with us today.
>
>
>
> I have traveled throughout the US and Canada hunting the bountiful
> wildlife we are so privileged to have and repeatedly sung the
> praises of our state as leaders in conservation and wildlife
> practices. We are at a threshold of opportunity and it is thru
> leadership by example and making informed decisions based on science
> and biology that we will take our rightful role in this very
> important movement. Please do not be misled by political or special
> interest groups that do not take our wildlife and our most precious
> resources into consideration, but seem to have simplistic and self
> serving answers. I have seen the end result of that process in
> China and can only work frantically on my properties to show an
> example of what can be a viable and sustainable alternative. I hope
> all of you will become informed on the entire subject and not just
> some small narrow band of interest. Take the challenge, help be
> part of the solution and not the problem. Please take time to read
> the attachment and if Dr . Lehman approves the idea I will send the
> interested parties the entire study.
>
>
>
> From: Bill McGuire [mailto:Bill.McGuire at mdc.mo.gov]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:05 AM
> To: 'steveaflick at earthlink.net'; 'Scott Woodbury'; 'Hamilton Native
> Outpost'; 'Frank Oberle'; Rudi Roeslein; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin
> Carpenter'; 'Jon Wingo'
> Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; John Hoskins;
> 'John Burk'; John Knudsen; 'Steve Mowry'; Dave Erickson; 'Denny
> Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly Srigley Werner';
> 'Linda Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan Hazelwood';
> 'Mike Currier'; 'Steve Heyling'; Andrew Forbes; 'James Trager'; 'Tim
> Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil wire'; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy;
> 'Dave Murphy'; Bill Bergh; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen Powell'; 'JR
> Flores'; 'Eddie Hamill'; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; 'Darlene Johnson';
> 'Karen Brinkman'; Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries;
> 'Jean Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Jerry Kaiser'; 'Ken Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> CRP is a national program and the reasons it exists are complex.
> There is not a lot of support at the national level (more broadly
> than conveyed below) to moving CRP away from the soil, water,
> wildlife and related purposes that have been legislated. There is
> more support for the idea of CRP as a reservoir of biomass
> feedstocks if done as compatible use (i.e. harvest OK as long as the
> purposes of the program are preserved and in accordance with
> existing authorities which reflect negotiated position among many
> diverse groups) – there is less support as thinking moves CRP away f
> rom that paradigm. Some of the USDA representatives receiving this
> message can correct me if wrong but biomass harvest from CRP has bee
> n possible since the 2002 Farm Bill. It is also important to know t
> hat CRP has been an important emergency reservoir of forage that has
> benefited livestock producers in times of weather-related disaster
> (many, many times in just about every state with significant CRP) an
> d that is only possible by way of CRP being what it is. CRP has alw
> ays been viewed as a reservoir of land that could quickly go back in
> crop production in the event of national emergency such as war (the
> Secretary of Agriculture has authority to make that call). It won’
> t be possible for CRP to be all of the above all the time and changi
> ng the magic of the formula that created and maintains CRP could ero
> de flexibility for the land to be what the country needs when it is
> needed.
>
>
>
> There is much uncertainty about the CRP and biofuel feedstock
> production but the following factors are very much at play:
>
>
>
> · Producing biofuel feedstocks on CRP or other land will acc
> omplish little unless there is a processing or other facility to use
> it within a reasonable distance (50-75 miles is the distance usuall
> y discussed because to transport farther makes biofuel production un
> economical).
>
> · Industry (and often academia) continues to be focused on m
> aximizing production from single-purpose monoculture production and
> that will drive things in the short term which could turn into the l
> ong term.
>
> · Funding and economics will be the overriding factors for s
> ome time to come (as in money from programs, tax or other incentives
> and bottom-line profitability).
>
> · Change to CRP that benefits wildlife in one part of the U.
> S. can result in harm to wildlife if applied in another place.
>
>
>
> A final word on CRP is simply to be aware that the playing field is
> very complicated as is the biofuels playing field. Put them
> together and you have a 3-D chess game in terms of complexity and
> that is loaded with potential for unintended consequence. My only
> advice is to seek to understand all the issues before coming to very
> many conclusions.
>
>
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> From: Steve Flick [mailto:steveaflick at earthlink.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 8:46 AM
> To: 'Scott Woodbury'; 'Hamilton Native Outpost'; 'Frank Oberle';
> 'Rudi Roeslein'; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin Carpenter'; 'Jon Wingo'
> Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; John Hoskins;
> 'John Burk'; John Knudsen; 'Steve Mowry'; Dave Erickson; 'Denny
> Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly Srigley Werner';
> 'Linda Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan Hazelwood';
> 'Mike Currier'; 'Steve Heyling'; Andrew Forbes; 'James Trager'; 'Tim
> Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil wire'; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy;
> 'Dave Murphy'; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen
> Powell'; 'JR Flores'; 'Eddie Hamill'; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek;
> 'Darlene Johnson'; 'Karen Brinkman'; Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson;
> Aaron Jeffries; 'Jean Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Jerry Kaiser';
> 'Ken Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> I have been growing miscanthus for years as a feedstock for the bio
> refinery- although there is a FSA program about to be launched for
> spring 2010 for dedicated energy crop production- you still need a
> organization to purchase that crop- and refine it
>
>
>
> As it relates to CRP- I believe you will have to get through policy
> of NWF/EDL/Nature Conservancy- to make that happen- they are big
> policy makers in D.C.- pretty tough assignment
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Steve A Flick Principal Environmental Ecologist
>
> Flick Seed Company
>
> 1764 N.W. 50 rd P.O. Box 128
>
> Kingsville, Mo. 64061
>
> 816-597-3822(o)
>
> 816-597-3663(f)
>
> www.seedguys.com
>
>
>
> Think Green. Please consider the environment before printing this e-
> mail.
>
> electronic Privacy Notice. This e-mail, and any attachments,
> contains information that is, or may be, covered by electronic
> communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and
> proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> be advised that you are legally prohibited from retaining, using,
> copying, distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in
> any manner. Instead, please reply to the sender that you have
> received this communication in error, and then immediately delete
> it. Thank you in advance for your cooperation
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Woodbury [mailto:Scott.Woodbury at mobot.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 8:32 AM
> To: Hamilton Native Outpost; Frank Oberle; Rudi Roeslein; Carol
> Davit; Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
> Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John Hoskins; John
> Burk; John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; David Erickson; Denny Donnell;
> Wayne Morton; George Seek; Kelly Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Alan
> Leary; Ted Cooper; Susan Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling;
> Andrew Forbes; James Trager; Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire;
> DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy; Dave Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire;
> Dwaine Gelnar; Allen Powell; JR Flores; Eddie Hamill; Gene Gardner;
> Tim Banek; Darlene Johnson; Karen Brinkman; Brent Jamison; Keith
> Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve Bruckerhoff; Steve
> Flick; Jerry Kaiser; Ken Struemph; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> This sounds great as long as long as landowners opt for a diverse
> planting in CRP. Right now the research on biomass is showing that
> sterile hybrid miscanthus yields 2-3 times as much biomass as native
> switchgrass, and therefore could bring in more money. That’s compari
> ng a pure stand of switchgrass to a pure stand of miscanthus. Now da
> ys’ CRP isn’t a pure stand of switchgrass. My fear is that
> landowners will drop CRP when they see that they can make more money
> growing miscanthus? Of course this can’t happen until Miscanthus pr
> oduction becomes mechanized. Please tell me otherwise. I don’t like
> the idea of miscanthus replacing CRP.
>
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> From: Hamilton Native Outpost [mailto:hamilton at train.missouri.org]
> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 1:56 PM
> To: 'Frank Oberle'; 'Rudi Roeslein'; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin
> Carpenter'; 'Jon Wingo'
> Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; 'John
> Hoskins'; 'John Burk'; 'John Knudsen'; 'Steve Mowry'; 'David
> Erickson'; 'Denny Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly
> Srigley Werner'; 'Linda Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan
> Hazelwood'; 'Mike Currier'; 'Steve Heyling'; 'Andrew Forbes'; James
> Trager; Scott Woodbury; 'Tim Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil
> wire'; 'DeeCee Darrow'; 'John Murphy'; 'Dave Murphy'; 'Bill Bergh';
> 'Bill McGuire'; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen Powell'; 'JR Flores'; 'Eddie
> Hamill'; 'Gene Gardner'; 'Tim Banek'; 'Darlene Johnson'; 'Karen
> Brinkman'; 'Brent Jamison'; 'Keith Jackson'; 'Aaron Jeffries'; 'Jean
> Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Steve Flick'; 'Jerry Kaiser'; 'Ken
> Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> CRP as we have known it in the past may have been a fescue field or
> a rank stand of native grasses with little diversity. Conservation
> is ready to step up to the next level and create rare and declining
> habitat. To marry biofuels with wildlife conservation has the added
> benefit of bringing disturbance into the picture. Disturbance is
> important to grasslands; fire, herbivores, and climatic extremes
> once acted as disturbance factors. The use of the mowing on the
> biofuel ¼ or 1/3 would be a forn of disturbance as would the burning
> on another ¼ or 1/3. Some of the grassland wildlife is even depend
> ent on this disturbance. I think this has lots of potential.
>
>
>
> Amy Hamilton
>
> Hamilton Native Outpost
>
>
>
> From: Frank Oberle [mailto:foberle at nemr.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 2:00 PM
> To: Rudi Roeslein; Carol Davit; Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
> Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Hamilton; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John
> Hoskins; John Burk; John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; Amy Buechler; David
> Erickson; Denny Donnell; Wayne Morton; George Seek; John Burk; Kelly
> Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Steve Mowry; Alan Leary; Ted Cooper;
> Susan Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling; Andrew Forbes; James
> Trager; Scott Woodbury; Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire;
> DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy; Dave Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire;
> Dwaine Gelnar; Allen Powell; JR Flores; Eddie Hamill; Dwaine Gelnar;
> Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; Darlene Johnson; Karen Brinkman; Brent
> Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve
> Bruckerhoff; Steve Flick; Jerry Kaiser; Ken Struemph; Andrew Forbes; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: Fw: biomass
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Policy and Policymakers
>
>
> In Washington, the popularity of the USDA's Biomass Crop Assistance
> Program has soared, with the number of qualifying facilities now
> exceeding 280. The Biomass Crop Assistance Program assists
> agricultural and forest land owners and operators with matching
> payments for the amount paid for the collection, harvest, storage
> and transportation of eligible material by a qualified Biomass
> Conversion Facility.
>
>
>
>
>
> Conservationist,
>
> I believe the time has come here in Missouri to begin a very
> strategic plan
>
> on how we can become not only serious players in the biomass
> industry, but how can
>
> we improve wildlife habitat at the same time. I will emphatically
> state there is
>
> known scientific evidence that will validate this claim--especially
> all CRP lands that
>
> currently--and maybe futuristically--are enrolled in a plant
> material--like fescue and
>
> brome--that has very little environmental benefits.
>
> In order to move an idea forward there has to be action. And
> there is no action
>
> until there is movement. My passion and cause for our state is to
> add wildlife,
>
> environmental and green energy benefits for Northern Missouri. How
> do we add
>
> value to an economically depressed area? Firstly, like a Doctor's
> oath of promise
>
> for receiving his degree: "Never to do Harm." We need to emulate
> nature's blueprint
>
> and follow a path of least resistance. It is always more difficult
> to bend mother
>
> nature to our wants, than it is to assimilate to an ideology that
> heeds to bending
>
> with her.
>
> One known truth evident here in N. Missouri is that we can
> grow native grass and
>
> broadleaf legumes. Cellulosic's greatest asset is that indigenous
> plant material suited to the soil and climate adds to the success of
> the project. We have the potential of
>
> rebuilding CRP with an ecologically sound plant material that will
> boost biodiversity
>
> and reviving rural economies.
>
> Please do not take my word for any of this, use the science at
> hand. There
>
> are entrepreneurs willing and hoping for such an opportunity. Does
> anyone
>
> out there have any suggestions on where or how to begin this
> endeavor? We have
>
> nearly 1.5 million acres of CRP here in Missouri. One plan could be
> that once
>
> the re-established CRP acres of any single tract of ground was
> deemed ready
>
> to be engaged into a regime of biomass/wildlife management rotation,
> one forth to one
>
> third of the tract would be allowed to be harvested in the months of
> October
>
> through January. There would be no rental penalty for the landowner
> to pay if the plant material was used in some biomass project. The
> next designated portion to be
>
> harvested--rather it be one third to one forth--would be eligible
> for a late spring burn
>
> to encourage both forb growth and grass development. When there is
> plenty of
>
> thatch build-up, there are less forbs that will have vigorous
> growth. We have
>
> experienced this fact in our production fields. It works like this.
> Plants store starches
>
> and sugars in their roots systems. In early spring, if there is a
> canopy of thatch which
>
> creates enormous shade, when the emerging plant sends it first two
> basal leaves
>
> for light scouting, perennial and long lived native plants will not
> take the risk of
>
> expending large amounts of root reserves to overtake the canopy--
> just too risky.
>
> There are many possibilities that could be worked out.
> Currently, though, I believe
>
> we could be passing on a great opportunity to rebuild our landscape
> to a vegetation that is suited to attract and sustain our rare and
> declining wildlife, but too, the biomass entrepreneurs. It also
> would be good for pollinators, producers and weaning our
>
> nation's dependency on imported fossil fuels. I'm not saying the
> above is the perfect set of blueprints for a run away success story,
> however, I can say with wisdom and discernment that CRP could use a
> make-over that gives the customer--our hard working American
> taxpayers--real dividends for their investment.
>
> In the beginning of the Conservation Reserve Program, the goals
> of preventing soil erosion and cleaning up our streams was an
> industrious and very successful
>
> conservation accomplishment. We have progressed immensely in the
> field of understanding and implementing native plant communities and
> the adverse affects of toxic and invasive fescue. The research going
> on at NRCS's Plant Material Center and
>
> MU's Bradford Farm will yield much to the enhancement of a myriad of
> wildlife and biomass concerns. Thanks to all those partners
> supporting these exigencies. fo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am using the Free version of SPAMfighter.
> We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
> SPAMfighter has removed 3630 of my spam emails to date.
> The Professional version does not have this message.
>
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ******************************************************************
> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by
> the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is
> intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which it is
> addressed and might contain confidential and/or privileged material.
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking
> of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
> entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material from any computer. confidential and/or privileged material.
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking
> of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
> entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material from any computer.
> <0565_001.pdf>
Please correct me if I am wrong, but approximately 53 years ago I
learned in college chemistry class that more energy is required to
distill ethanon than is gotten out of the final product. We talked
about perpetual motion devices at the same time.
I assume that process has not changed, and ethanol production in most
situations is relying on fossil fuel to heat the mash.
Apparently the money trail is what counts, not the energy trail in
ethanol production.....I'm not going there.
If distilation of alcohol could be accomplished using the spent steam
from steam generating plants (coal gas and NUKE), it seems the ethanol
manufacturers could hold their heads much higher in this greening world.
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 21, 2009, at 2:06 PM, Rudi Roeslein <RRoeslein at ROESLEIN.com>
wrote:
> Thank you all for your professional and very well thought out and
> varied input on this matter. I am the CEO of a company www.roeslein.com
> that has actually been involved in the ethanol industry for a
> number of years and in fact just completed two very large corn based
> projects for EBenX/Abengoa, in Illinois and in Indiana. We have also
> worked with BlueFire on their Lancaster California proposed project
> for several years. We have also been instrumental in taking modular
> processes to over 40 different countries in the past 20 years using
> a modular approach that uses American Technology, but more
> importantly our labor to produce and manufacture over 60 % of the
> labor that would normally be stick built in these foreign
> countries. All of these processes were proven and commercially
> viable, and they had a track record of success in the US before we
> took them overseas.
>
>
>
> The facts regarding the bio fuel industry and which technology will
> actually prove to be commercially viable are still evolving and
> unproven commercially. There are several technologies that have
> been proven to work in both laboratory scales and even with
> demonstration scales. It is however a huge leap commercially and
> technologically to scale these units up to a commercially viable
> production facility. It will take companies with a proven track
> record of success in related industries and that have the financial
> staying power to weather the financial droughts to be successful in
> this arena. I have spent the last three years studying this
> industry in order to make sound and well informed decisions on which
> process company we should engage our modular services with the
> expectation of provide long term modular engineering and
> manufacturing services.
>
> I have also visited the University of Minnesota and met with Dr.
> David Tilman and Dr. Clarence Lehman to discuss their views on this
> subject and to visit their research farm where they are growing
> various grasses and conducting a variety of tests. I have also met
> with Dr. Peter Raven, the Director of the Missouri Botanical garden
> regarding the biodiversity of plants and animals and how various
> countries like China are dealing with their industrialization and
> the environment. I have read countless magazines, articles,
> publications and must profess I still do not pretend to be “smarter
> than a fifth grader”. These efforts were all towards making a sound
> decision as to the right decision on feedstock materials.
>
>
>
> I have traveled extensively to China since 1982, and have witnessed
> firsthand the growth of industry, infrastructure, and the shift from
> fairly low energy means of transportation such as bicycles, motor
> scooters, trains, buses, and just plain foot power to a highly
> mechanized motorcade of cars and other combustion engines. Because
> Dr. Raven has worked with many different countries and especially
> China we discussed the biodiversity of plants along the more
> industrialized eastern sections of the country and shared the same
> view. It is an ecological travesty and a disaster. The rivers are
> extremely polluted, the natural resources are exploited to the
> breaking point and in a lot of cities the air quality is
> deplorable. What does that have to do with this subject? I believe
> it has to do with the fact that China is a window into the future of
> any developing nation dealing with a very high demand on all of its
> resources because of population explosions. When I immigrated to
> the US in 1956 there were 150 million people. Today there are over
> 300 million people. The burgeoning demands on all of our resources
> will continue to grow and it scares the hell out of me to think that
> China is an example of what could happen here. I am sure there are
> a few right now saying that can’t happen, but in just the last 20 ye
> ars of my travelling back and forth from St. Louis to my central Mis
> souri farm in Osage County I have seen a tremendous amount of growth
> and development that has continued to gobble up prime farm real est
> ate and wildlife habitat. I have travelled all over the US and seen
> the same explosion.
>
>
>
> I truly believe that Missouri needs a comprehensive energy, land,
> water, and resource utilization plan that inventories what we have
> today and how we best intend to utilize those resources in the
> future, as well as position Missouri to attract the leading process
> providers in this industry.. Dr. Clarence Lehman and some of his
> colleagues at the University of Minnesota prepared a very
> comprehensive feasibility study for the White Horse Indian
> reservation, that “presents a detailed analysis of the economic and
> technical feasibility of utilizing existing biomass resources on the
> White Horse Reservation to develop a renewable energy biofuels demo
> nstration facility. It also considers the possibility of developing
> , harvesting and marketing native prairie plants and seeds for bioen
> ergy production.” I am copying Dr Lehman on this email since he was
> kind enough to provide me with a copy of this extremely professiona
> l and well done study. I am sharing the executive summary with this
> group since I believe it is imperative that the policy makers and t
> he decision makers of this state become well informed regarding this
> important subject. There will be many companies and people purport
> ed to have the solutions and answers for this hot and politically ch
> arges subject. I believe the State of Missouri should do a similar
> study before deciding how and where to spend the money that is going
> to be expended for this exciting new industry. We have an opportun
> ity to get it right and combine our industrial efforts and economic
> stimulus with environmental and conservation causes that are scienti
> fically sound and environmentally sustainable. I believe the 20 yea
> rs that Dr. Tilman and other renowned scientists have studied the be
> nefits of a diverse and varied planting has convinced me the sustai
> nable way of taking this industry is thru the use of our prairie pla
> nting and the many benefits derived from this once abundant and bene
> ficial eco system. I am working with the process providers to convi
> nce them to develop their processes to be able to fully utilize thes
> e resources. It is up to the assigned representatives of Missouri t
> o come up with a plan to attract investment. The planting of grassla
> nds is an essential part of the needs of this industry, and needs t
> o be a very high priority or we will be left out of the mainstream m
> ovement. If you don’t have the supply of biomass material the proce
> ss providers will not come. I believe such a study would certainly
> be a good first step in the right direction. If Dr. Lehman approves
> the idea I will send interested parties a full copy of this report
> , or would be happy to meet with them to review the entire report.”
> This study evaluated the conversion platforms ranging from the simpl
> e to the complex with the common goal of converting renewable biomas
> s to some useful form of energy that is called biofuel.”
>
>
>
> The question to be answered by the study are:
>
> 1.How do the various conversion platforms differ?
>
> 2.How does plant scale affect economic performance?
>
> 3.What are capital costs and return on investment for the platforms?
>
> 4.What is the financial impact of biomass cost and rack prices of
> ethanol and gasoline?
>
> 5. How much biomass is required for different platforms?
>
>
>
> I have purchased 1100 acres of land in Putnam county and will be
> converting the marginal agricultural land to native prairie
> plantings and am currently working with the MDC, PLM John Murphy to
> provide an example of what can be done with WSG plantings and have
> at least 300 to 500 acres of prairie plantings available for our
> process providers by the time they are ready to take their process
> commercial. This is obviously a drop in the bucket since it will
> take over four hundred thousands acres to support a single 50 mm
> gallon economically viable plant, and as has been pointed out within
> a economical viable range of that plant. I am taking the prairie
> planting route since it provides so many environmental benefits that
> are lacking in monolithic plantings of most other alternatives.
> Since this farm is located near an area that once supported prairie
> chickens I am hoping an added befit will be to provide the wildlife
> friendly grasses and forbs necessary to the survival of this
> diminishing species.
>
>
>
> In addition, Dr. Tilman’s studies have repeatedly demonstrated these
> benefits to be to sequester CO2, filter the water, as well as reple
> nish the ground water table, prevent soil erosion, provide innumerab
> le wildlife habitat benefits, and provide the insects and forage tha
> t most cool season grasses, especially fescue is lacking. Even if B
> iofuel develops in a different direction or not at all these biodive
> rse plantings in native prairie are a sound investment in our envir
> onment and our wildlife conservation program.. The very biodiversit
> y that makes them a challenge will bring out the best in our technol
> ogical superiority, and our ingenuity. We did to go to the moon wit
> hout overcoming challenges and developing new products and technolo
> gy. No, I believe if we had not gone to the moon many of the new sc
> ientific break thru in computer technology, propellants and untold
> other new inventions that would not be with us today.
>
>
>
> I have traveled throughout the US and Canada hunting the bountiful
> wildlife we are so privileged to have and repeatedly sung the
> praises of our state as leaders in conservation and wildlife
> practices. We are at a threshold of opportunity and it is thru
> leadership by example and making informed decisions based on science
> and biology that we will take our rightful role in this very
> important movement. Please do not be misled by political or special
> interest groups that do not take our wildlife and our most precious
> resources into consideration, but seem to have simplistic and self
> serving answers. I have seen the end result of that process in
> China and can only work frantically on my properties to show an
> example of what can be a viable and sustainable alternative. I hope
> all of you will become informed on the entire subject and not just
> some small narrow band of interest. Take the challenge, help be
> part of the solution and not the problem. Please take time to read
> the attachment and if Dr . Lehman approves the idea I will send the
> interested parties the entire study.
>
>
>
> From: Bill McGuire [mailto:Bill.McGuire at mdc.mo.gov]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 10:05 AM
> To: 'steveaflick at earthlink.net'; 'Scott Woodbury'; 'Hamilton Native
> Outpost'; 'Frank Oberle'; Rudi Roeslein; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin
> Carpenter'; 'Jon Wingo'
> Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; John Hoskins;
> 'John Burk'; John Knudsen; 'Steve Mowry'; Dave Erickson; 'Denny
> Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly Srigley Werner';
> 'Linda Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan Hazelwood';
> 'Mike Currier'; 'Steve Heyling'; Andrew Forbes; 'James Trager'; 'Tim
> Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil wire'; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy;
> 'Dave Murphy'; Bill Bergh; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen Powell'; 'JR
> Flores'; 'Eddie Hamill'; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; 'Darlene Johnson';
> 'Karen Brinkman'; Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries;
> 'Jean Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Jerry Kaiser'; 'Ken Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> CRP is a national program and the reasons it exists are complex.
> There is not a lot of support at the national level (more broadly
> than conveyed below) to moving CRP away from the soil, water,
> wildlife and related purposes that have been legislated. There is
> more support for the idea of CRP as a reservoir of biomass
> feedstocks if done as compatible use (i.e. harvest OK as long as the
> purposes of the program are preserved and in accordance with
> existing authorities which reflect negotiated position among many
> diverse groups) – there is less support as thinking moves CRP away f
> rom that paradigm. Some of the USDA representatives receiving this
> message can correct me if wrong but biomass harvest from CRP has bee
> n possible since the 2002 Farm Bill. It is also important to know t
> hat CRP has been an important emergency reservoir of forage that has
> benefited livestock producers in times of weather-related disaster
> (many, many times in just about every state with significant CRP) an
> d that is only possible by way of CRP being what it is. CRP has alw
> ays been viewed as a reservoir of land that could quickly go back in
> crop production in the event of national emergency such as war (the
> Secretary of Agriculture has authority to make that call). It won’
> t be possible for CRP to be all of the above all the time and changi
> ng the magic of the formula that created and maintains CRP could ero
> de flexibility for the land to be what the country needs when it is
> needed.
>
>
>
> There is much uncertainty about the CRP and biofuel feedstock
> production but the following factors are very much at play:
>
>
>
> · Producing biofuel feedstocks on CRP or other land will acc
> omplish little unless there is a processing or other facility to use
> it within a reasonable distance (50-75 miles is the distance usuall
> y discussed because to transport farther makes biofuel production un
> economical).
>
> · Industry (and often academia) continues to be focused on m
> aximizing production from single-purpose monoculture production and
> that will drive things in the short term which could turn into the l
> ong term.
>
> · Funding and economics will be the overriding factors for s
> ome time to come (as in money from programs, tax or other incentives
> and bottom-line profitability).
>
> · Change to CRP that benefits wildlife in one part of the U.
> S. can result in harm to wildlife if applied in another place.
>
>
>
> A final word on CRP is simply to be aware that the playing field is
> very complicated as is the biofuels playing field. Put them
> together and you have a 3-D chess game in terms of complexity and
> that is loaded with potential for unintended consequence. My only
> advice is to seek to understand all the issues before coming to very
> many conclusions.
>
>
>
> Bill
>
>
>
> From: Steve Flick [mailto:steveaflick at earthlink.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 8:46 AM
> To: 'Scott Woodbury'; 'Hamilton Native Outpost'; 'Frank Oberle';
> 'Rudi Roeslein'; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin Carpenter'; 'Jon Wingo'
> Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; John Hoskins;
> 'John Burk'; John Knudsen; 'Steve Mowry'; Dave Erickson; 'Denny
> Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly Srigley Werner';
> 'Linda Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan Hazelwood';
> 'Mike Currier'; 'Steve Heyling'; Andrew Forbes; 'James Trager'; 'Tim
> Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil wire'; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy;
> 'Dave Murphy'; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen
> Powell'; 'JR Flores'; 'Eddie Hamill'; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek;
> 'Darlene Johnson'; 'Karen Brinkman'; Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson;
> Aaron Jeffries; 'Jean Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Jerry Kaiser';
> 'Ken Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> I have been growing miscanthus for years as a feedstock for the bio
> refinery- although there is a FSA program about to be launched for
> spring 2010 for dedicated energy crop production- you still need a
> organization to purchase that crop- and refine it
>
>
>
> As it relates to CRP- I believe you will have to get through policy
> of NWF/EDL/Nature Conservancy- to make that happen- they are big
> policy makers in D.C.- pretty tough assignment
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> Steve A Flick Principal Environmental Ecologist
>
> Flick Seed Company
>
> 1764 N.W. 50 rd P.O. Box 128
>
> Kingsville, Mo. 64061
>
> 816-597-3822(o)
>
> 816-597-3663(f)
>
> www.seedguys.com
>
>
>
> Think Green. Please consider the environment before printing this e-
> mail.
>
> electronic Privacy Notice. This e-mail, and any attachments,
> contains information that is, or may be, covered by electronic
> communications privacy laws, and is also confidential and
> proprietary in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please
> be advised that you are legally prohibited from retaining, using,
> copying, distributing, or otherwise disclosing this information in
> any manner. Instead, please reply to the sender that you have
> received this communication in error, and then immediately delete
> it. Thank you in advance for your cooperation
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Woodbury [mailto:Scott.Woodbury at mobot.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 8:32 AM
> To: Hamilton Native Outpost; Frank Oberle; Rudi Roeslein; Carol
> Davit; Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
> Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John Hoskins; John
> Burk; John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; David Erickson; Denny Donnell;
> Wayne Morton; George Seek; Kelly Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Alan
> Leary; Ted Cooper; Susan Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling;
> Andrew Forbes; James Trager; Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire;
> DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy; Dave Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire;
> Dwaine Gelnar; Allen Powell; JR Flores; Eddie Hamill; Gene Gardner;
> Tim Banek; Darlene Johnson; Karen Brinkman; Brent Jamison; Keith
> Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve Bruckerhoff; Steve
> Flick; Jerry Kaiser; Ken Struemph; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> This sounds great as long as long as landowners opt for a diverse
> planting in CRP. Right now the research on biomass is showing that
> sterile hybrid miscanthus yields 2-3 times as much biomass as native
> switchgrass, and therefore could bring in more money. That’s compari
> ng a pure stand of switchgrass to a pure stand of miscanthus. Now da
> ys’ CRP isn’t a pure stand of switchgrass. My fear is that
> landowners will drop CRP when they see that they can make more money
> growing miscanthus? Of course this can’t happen until Miscanthus pr
> oduction becomes mechanized. Please tell me otherwise. I don’t like
> the idea of miscanthus replacing CRP.
>
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> From: Hamilton Native Outpost [mailto:hamilton at train.missouri.org]
> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 1:56 PM
> To: 'Frank Oberle'; 'Rudi Roeslein'; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin
> Carpenter'; 'Jon Wingo'
> Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; 'John
> Hoskins'; 'John Burk'; 'John Knudsen'; 'Steve Mowry'; 'David
> Erickson'; 'Denny Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly
> Srigley Werner'; 'Linda Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan
> Hazelwood'; 'Mike Currier'; 'Steve Heyling'; 'Andrew Forbes'; James
> Trager; Scott Woodbury; 'Tim Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil
> wire'; 'DeeCee Darrow'; 'John Murphy'; 'Dave Murphy'; 'Bill Bergh';
> 'Bill McGuire'; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen Powell'; 'JR Flores'; 'Eddie
> Hamill'; 'Gene Gardner'; 'Tim Banek'; 'Darlene Johnson'; 'Karen
> Brinkman'; 'Brent Jamison'; 'Keith Jackson'; 'Aaron Jeffries'; 'Jean
> Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Steve Flick'; 'Jerry Kaiser'; 'Ken
> Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> CRP as we have known it in the past may have been a fescue field or
> a rank stand of native grasses with little diversity. Conservation
> is ready to step up to the next level and create rare and declining
> habitat. To marry biofuels with wildlife conservation has the added
> benefit of bringing disturbance into the picture. Disturbance is
> important to grasslands; fire, herbivores, and climatic extremes
> once acted as disturbance factors. The use of the mowing on the
> biofuel ¼ or 1/3 would be a forn of disturbance as would the burning
> on another ¼ or 1/3. Some of the grassland wildlife is even depend
> ent on this disturbance. I think this has lots of potential.
>
>
>
> Amy Hamilton
>
> Hamilton Native Outpost
>
>
>
> From: Frank Oberle [mailto:foberle at nemr.net]
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 2:00 PM
> To: Rudi Roeslein; Carol Davit; Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
> Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Hamilton; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John
> Hoskins; John Burk; John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; Amy Buechler; David
> Erickson; Denny Donnell; Wayne Morton; George Seek; John Burk; Kelly
> Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Steve Mowry; Alan Leary; Ted Cooper;
> Susan Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling; Andrew Forbes; James
> Trager; Scott Woodbury; Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire;
> DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy; Dave Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire;
> Dwaine Gelnar; Allen Powell; JR Flores; Eddie Hamill; Dwaine Gelnar;
> Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; Darlene Johnson; Karen Brinkman; Brent
> Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve
> Bruckerhoff; Steve Flick; Jerry Kaiser; Ken Struemph; Andrew Forbes; staceyg at missouri.edu
> Subject: Fw: biomass
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Policy and Policymakers
>
>
> In Washington, the popularity of the USDA's Biomass Crop Assistance
> Program has soared, with the number of qualifying facilities now
> exceeding 280. The Biomass Crop Assistance Program assists
> agricultural and forest land owners and operators with matching
> payments for the amount paid for the collection, harvest, storage
> and transportation of eligible material by a qualified Biomass
> Conversion Facility.
>
>
>
>
>
> Conservationist,
>
> I believe the time has come here in Missouri to begin a very
> strategic plan
>
> on how we can become not only serious players in the biomass
> industry, but how can
>
> we improve wildlife habitat at the same time. I will emphatically
> state there is
>
> known scientific evidence that will validate this claim--especially
> all CRP lands that
>
> currently--and maybe futuristically--are enrolled in a plant
> material--like fescue and
>
> brome--that has very little environmental benefits.
>
> In order to move an idea forward there has to be action. And
> there is no action
>
> until there is movement. My passion and cause for our state is to
> add wildlife,
>
> environmental and green energy benefits for Northern Missouri. How
> do we add
>
> value to an economically depressed area? Firstly, like a Doctor's
> oath of promise
>
> for receiving his degree: "Never to do Harm." We need to emulate
> nature's blueprint
>
> and follow a path of least resistance. It is always more difficult
> to bend mother
>
> nature to our wants, than it is to assimilate to an ideology that
> heeds to bending
>
> with her.
>
> One known truth evident here in N. Missouri is that we can
> grow native grass and
>
> broadleaf legumes. Cellulosic's greatest asset is that indigenous
> plant material suited to the soil and climate adds to the success of
> the project. We have the potential of
>
> rebuilding CRP with an ecologically sound plant material that will
> boost biodiversity
>
> and reviving rural economies.
>
> Please do not take my word for any of this, use the science at
> hand. There
>
> are entrepreneurs willing and hoping for such an opportunity. Does
> anyone
>
> out there have any suggestions on where or how to begin this
> endeavor? We have
>
> nearly 1.5 million acres of CRP here in Missouri. One plan could be
> that once
>
> the re-established CRP acres of any single tract of ground was
> deemed ready
>
> to be engaged into a regime of biomass/wildlife management rotation,
> one forth to one
>
> third of the tract would be allowed to be harvested in the months of
> October
>
> through January. There would be no rental penalty for the landowner
> to pay if the plant material was used in some biomass project. The
> next designated portion to be
>
> harvested--rather it be one third to one forth--would be eligible
> for a late spring burn
>
> to encourage both forb growth and grass development. When there is
> plenty of
>
> thatch build-up, there are less forbs that will have vigorous
> growth. We have
>
> experienced this fact in our production fields. It works like this.
> Plants store starches
>
> and sugars in their roots systems. In early spring, if there is a
> canopy of thatch which
>
> creates enormous shade, when the emerging plant sends it first two
> basal leaves
>
> for light scouting, perennial and long lived native plants will not
> take the risk of
>
> expending large amounts of root reserves to overtake the canopy--
> just too risky.
>
> There are many possibilities that could be worked out.
> Currently, though, I believe
>
> we could be passing on a great opportunity to rebuild our landscape
> to a vegetation that is suited to attract and sustain our rare and
> declining wildlife, but too, the biomass entrepreneurs. It also
> would be good for pollinators, producers and weaning our
>
> nation's dependency on imported fossil fuels. I'm not saying the
> above is the perfect set of blueprints for a run away success story,
> however, I can say with wisdom and discernment that CRP could use a
> make-over that gives the customer--our hard working American
> taxpayers--real dividends for their investment.
>
> In the beginning of the Conservation Reserve Program, the goals
> of preventing soil erosion and cleaning up our streams was an
> industrious and very successful
>
> conservation accomplishment. We have progressed immensely in the
> field of understanding and implementing native plant communities and
> the adverse affects of toxic and invasive fescue. The research going
> on at NRCS's Plant Material Center and
>
> MU's Bradford Farm will yield much to the enhancement of a myriad of
> wildlife and biomass concerns. Thanks to all those partners
> supporting these exigencies. fo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am using the Free version of SPAMfighter.
> We are a community of 6 million users fighting spam.
> SPAMfighter has removed 3630 of my spam emails to date.
> The Professional version does not have this message.
>
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ***
> ******************************************************************
> The information transmitted (including attachments) is covered by
> the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is
> intended only for the person(s) or entity/entities to which it is
> addressed and might contain confidential and/or privileged material.
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking
> of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
> entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material from any computer. confidential and/or privileged material.
> Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking
> of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or
> entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material from any computer.
> <0565_001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.seaplace.org/pipermail/carpenter/attachments/20091224/6f2d2f59/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Carpenter
mailing list