Dr. Julie Barrette

Can
salvaged trees from boreal
forests “fuel”
the forestry and bioenergy
sectors?
Julie Barrette, post-doctoral fellow
Canadian Forest Service, Quebec, Canada.
julie.barrette@rncan.gc.ca
Biomass projects running within
the CFS and Laval University
•
EcoEnergy Innovation Initiative –Biomass for bioenergy from managed
forests through the value chain modelling availability as a function of
ecological and industrial drivers. Previously led by E. Thiffault, NRCAN (20122016). Now led by D. Paré.
•
Program on Energy Research and Development – Predicting sustainable
forest biomass feedstocks – led by D. Paré, NRCAN (2013-2015)
•
BioFuelnet – Establishing biomass suplly chains from natural disturbances in
Canadian Boreal Forest (ID 49), led by L. Lebel, Laval University (phase I)
•
BioFuelnet – Assessing the availability and the potential conversion into
biofuels of unloved wood: creating and interface with traditional wood
product indutries – led by E. Thiffault, Laval University (phase II)
Researchers involved
•
•
•
•
•
•
Evelyne Thiffault, Laval University
David Paré, NRCAN-CFS
Alexis Achim, Laval University
Suzanne Wetzel, NRCAN-CWFC
Isabelle Duchesne, NRCAN-CWFC
Sally Krigstin, University of Toronto
Context
• Forest biomass from trees killed by natural disturbances = a
promising resource for bioenergy at the global scale (IPCC 2011).
• In Canada, the forest landbase is largely influenced by natural
disturbances = great proportion of biomass, greater than clearcut
harvesting residues for the production of bioenergy (Chum et al.
2011, Stinson et al. 2011, Dymond et al. 2010).
Natural disturbance
Natural disturbance
Spruce budworm outbreaks tend to
occur every 40 years (Boulanger and
Arsenault 2004, NRCAN 2012) and
affect about 1.5 million hectares per
year in Canada (NRCAN 2012).
Natural disturbance
Windthrow hazard depends upon
the interaction between
numerous factors related to
climate, topography, soil and
stand characteristics (Ruel 1995)
Concerns
•
The effect of wood degradation on the quality of wood from salvaged trees
for the production of bioenergy and biorefinery end-products is not well
known.
•
It is essential to improve our understanding of how wood degradation may
affect the quality of the biomass feedstock to produce biofuel and
biorefinery end-products.
© Made-in-China.com
Adapted from Hunter 1990
Dead trees
• When a tree dies:
– moisture content drops
– reserve subtances are removed
= lead to more porous and
lighter wood (Fahey et al., 1986)
– invasions by saprophytic fungi
and secondary insects = saprot
Wood degradation
• The brown rot fungi
(mostly in conifers)
•
decompose mainly
the cellulose and
hemicelluloses,
leaving the lignin
mostly untouched
(Blanchette et al.
1989; Schmidt 2006).
• The white rot fungi
(mostly in hardwood but
also present in conifers)
• decompose mainly the
lignin, leaving the
hemicelluloses and cellulose
mostly untouched (Rayner and
Boddy 1988; Moore 2013)
• No rot fungi if
moisture content
less than 20%
(Bowyer et al. 2007).
Wood degradation
•
Wood rot fungi may also change the contents of some chemical
components.
•
The chemical components that are more likely to change with the action of
the decomposers are: N, P, and S
• Normally, the N and P contents increase as wood becomes more
decayed (Alban and Pastor 1993; Laiho and Prescott 1999; Boulanger
and Sirois 2006; Strukelj et al. 2013).
• Important decline in K with wood decay has also been observed
(Lambert et al. 1980; Alban and Pastor 1993).
• Ca might however accumulate (Volpio and Laasko, 1992)
These chemical changes are important to be understood
• as they may affect the efficiency of a biomass conversion process
• and the emissions of NOx and SOx.
Trials
A: Fire-killed stands
•5 and 8 years after fire
•Black spruce and Jack pine
B: Spruce budworm killed
stands
•Balsam fir and black spruce
Trials -samples
Living
Living
Dying
Dead
New
dead
Old
dead
Old
Dead (more
decomposed)
Samples –wood properties
• Wood properties:
• Thermal
-HHV, LHV
• Physical
– specific gravity (wood density)
– MC
– Wood decay
• Chemical
-
Hemicelluloses, cellulose, lignin, extractives
Minor ash forming element (Cu, Zn) (particulate emissions and environment
assessments)
Major ash forming element (P, K, Ca, Mg, Al, Fe) (ash melting behavour)
C, N, S
Ash
Results
• A: Fire-Killed Trees
– Moisture content, density, HHV, Ash
Degradation classes:
1= Living trees
2= New dead
3= Old dead
4= Old dead (more decomposed)
BS=black spruce
JP= Jack pine
Results
A: Fire-Killed Trees
-Lignin, cellulose, hemicelluloses, extractives
Degradation classes:
1= Living trees
2= New dead
3= Old dead
4= Old dead (more decomposed)
BS=black spruce
JP= Jack pine
Results
• B: Spruce budworm killed trees
– Decay, Density, Humidity, HHV, Ash
Table1: Mean and standard-deviation of the different wood properties measured in the mixed stand (n=24 trees).
Wood decay increased with
Stage of wood
Density Humidity (%) HHV (MJ/Kg)
decomposition Species Decay (%)
*
*
*
Ash (%)
tree degradation status
BS
0±0a
Living
BF
a
Dying
BS
Living
Dying
New dead
New dead
Old dead
Old dead
BF
BS
BF
0.44±0.07 72.03±27.10
19.80±0.03
0.32±0.03
0.36±0.01 102.85±13.30
20.26±0.48
0.31±0.04
58.70±50.97ab 0.43±0.08 50.97±15.38
19.68±0.30
0.70±0.31
0±0
ab
0.34±0.03 115.52±29.25
20.13±0.13
0.51±0.18
ab
0.40±0.07 60.46±30.91
19.84±0.15
0.33±0.08
ab
20.75±25.47
31.92±32.65
31.01±26.70
BS
BF
0.36±0.04 75.43±32.93
20.12±0.09
0.49±0.14
b
76.73±40.30 0.40±0.03 33.78±10.15
20.13±0.05
0.43±0.06
b
20.03±0.09
0.64±0.51
50.80±36.43 0.38±0.05 84.03±45.75
without significant changes in
wood properties.
However, we observed: an
increase in ash content in
dying and old dead trees with
a diminution in MC.
* indicate that there is a significant difference between the species
(ANOVA, p-value of 0.05)
a
, b and c: indicate that there are significant difference between the wood decomposition classes
(Tukey test, p-value of 0.05)
BS= black spruce, BF= balsam fir
Results
• B: Spruce budworm killed trees
– C, N, S
Nitrogen
Stage of wood
pH
Carbon (%)
(%)
decomposition
Species
*
*
*
Sulfur (%)
Living
BS
5.27±0.09
50.78±0.19
0±0
0.01±0.0
Living
BF
5.51±0.17
51.77±0.64
0.03±0.03
0.01±0.01
Dying
BS
4.63±0.49
49.86±0.66
0.01±0.02
0.01±0.01
Dying
BF
5.34±0.19
51.72±0.14
0.02±0.01
0.01±0.01
New dead
BS
4.58±0.37
50.68±0.22
0±0
0.01±0.0
New dead
BF
5.53±0.23
51.61±0.31
0.02±0.02
0.01±0.01
Old dead
BS
4.06±0.35
51.24±0.31
0±0
0.01±0.0
Old dead
BF
5.12±0.36
51.31±0.26
0.05±0.0
0.01±0.0
Contents of C, N and S were not significantly affected by wood
degradation and tree death = no emission problems
Results
• B: Spruce budworm killed trees
– Major ash forming element (ash melting behavour)
Stage of wood
decomposition
Living
P (g/kg)
Species
BS
K (g/kg)
*
*
0.04±0.01
a
a
Mg (g/kg)
Ca (g/kg)
*
1.07±0.08
a
0.43±0.07
0.85±0.22
a
0.27±0.04
Al (mg/kg)
Fe (mg/kg)
0.13±0.02
a
27.03±2.97 33.35±30.07
0.17±0.03
a
30.67±4.24
7.07±1.94
Living
BF
0.06±0.02
Dying
BS
0.03±0.01b
0.73±0.41
2.14±1.00b
0.32±0.17b
17.79±4.35
9.29±7.55
Dying
BF
0.02±0.01b
0.85±0.32
1.22±0.49b
0.33±0.14b
30.09±4.48
7.90±2.81
New dead
BS
0.03±0.01
ab
0.28±0.13
1.06±0.10
ab
ab
47.80±29.03
4.38±2.52
New dead
BF
0.04±0.02ab
0.72±0.23
1.12±0.25ab 0.27±0.10ab 48.78±32.22 60.63±57.66
Old dead
BS
0.03±0.01ab
0.25±0.04
1.32±0.16ab 0.14±0.03ab 36.53±25.03 27.14±32.17
Old dead
BF
0.05±0.02ab
1.53±1.67
1.14±0.31ab 0.34±0.20ab 29.54±8.17
0.13±0.03
Compared to living trees, Mg and Ca contents in dying trees
seemed to increase.
6.06±1.93
Results
• B: Spruce budworm killed trees
– Minor ash forming element (particulate emissions and environment
assessment)
Stage of wood
Cu (mg/kg)
Zn (mg/kg)
decomposition
Species
*
*
Living
BS
9.76±2.44
17.02±2.60
Living
BF
9.80±2.94
11.17±5.43
Dying
BS
4.16±1.48
21.83±6.98
Dying
BF
8.03±2.90
12.32±2.70
New dead
BS
7.11±4.38
19.66±12.66
New dead
BF
15.65±6.22
14.32±4.00
Old dead
BS
7.22±4.29
33.20±24.72
Old dead
BF
8.63±4.56
11.83±4.06
Cu and Zn did not seem to be
significantly affected by wood
degradation after tree death.
Conclusion

Important natural reduction in moisture content may result in huge savings.

Specific gravity remained relatively stable except with well advanced decay
trees ; may affect potential recovery.

Stable heating values through degradation.

Ash content dropped in fire-killed trees while it increased in spruce budworm
killed trees; decay and moisture content.

Slight increase in lignin and hemicellulose contents; brown-rot fungi.

Decrease in cellulose, extractives and ash contents; decomposers + fire.

Ultimately, this characterisation will provide the necessary information to
assess the potential of this type of wood for various bioenergy pathways and
will build modelling capacity that will help forest management and forest
industry to develop new bioenergy projects.
Further information
Ongoing work
•
Barrette, J., Thiffault, E, Achim, A., Junginger, M., Pothier, D., and DeGrandPré,
L. in preparation. An economic analysis of the potential of dead trees from
the boreal forest of Eastern Canada to serve as feedstock for wood pellet
exports.
•
Joshi, L. Krigstin, S., Wetzel, S., Barrette, J. Thiffault, E. and Duchesne, I. in
preparation. Suitability of salvaged wood from forest fire as a raw material
for energy pellet.
References
•
Alban, D.H. and Pastor, J. 1993. Decomposition of aspen, spruce, and pine boles on two sites in Minnesota. Can. J. For. Res. 23:1744-1749.
•
Boulanger, Y. and Arsenault, D. 2004. Spruce budworm outbreaks in eastern Quebec over the last 450 years. Can. J. For. Res. 34: 10351043.
•
Boulanger, Y. and Sirois, L. 2006. Postfire dynamics of black spruce coarse woody debris in northern boreal forest of Quebec. Can. J. For.
Res. 36: 1770-1780.
•
Bowyer, J. L., R. Shmulsky, and Haygreen, J.G. 2007. Forest Products and Wood Science. An Introduction. Fourth Edition. Iowa State Press.
576p.
•
Blanchette, R.A., Nilsson, T., Daniel, G., and Abad, A. 1989. Biological degradation of wood. Archaeological wood: American Chemical
Society: 141-74.
•
Chum, H., Faaij, A., Moreira, J., Berndes, G., Dhamija, P., Dong, H., Gabrielle, B., Goss Eng, A., Lucht, W., Mapako, M., Masera Cerutti, O.,
McIntyre, T., Minowa, T., Pingoud, K. 2011. Bioenergy. In: IPCC Special report on Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change
Mitigation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA. pp. 214-331.
•
Dymond, C.C., Titus, B.D., Stinson, G., and Kurz, W.A., 2010. Future quantities and spatial distribution of harvesting residue and dead wood
from natural disturbances in Canada. For. Ecol. Manage. 260 : 181-192.
•
Fahey, T.D., Snellgrove, T.A. and Plank, M.E. 1986. Changes in product recovery between live and dead lodgepole pine: a compendium.
USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Station. Research Paper PNW-353. 25p.
•
Hunter, M.L. Jr. 1990. Wildlife, forest and forestry: principles of managing forest for biological diversity. Prentice Hall, 370 pp.
•
Laiho, R. and Prescott, C.E. 1999. The contribution of coarse woody debris to carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus cycles in the three Rocky
Mountain forests. Can. J. For. Res. 29, 1592-1603.
References
•
Lambert, R. L., Lang, G.E. and Reiners, W.A. 1980. Loss of mass and chemical changes in decaying boles of
a subalpine balsam fir forest. Ecology. 61(6):1460-1473.
•
Moore, D. 2013. Fungal biology in the origin and emergence of life. Cambridge University Press, 236 pp.
•
NRCAN. 2012. Research at the Laurentian Forestry Centre of Natural Resources Canada. Spruce budworm.
Catalogue No.: FoI 14-13/1-2012-PDF. ISBN: 978-1-100-54256-0. 16 p.
•
Rayner, A.D.M. and Boddy, L. 1988. Fungal decomposition of wood, its biology and ecology. Wiley.
•
Ruel, J-C. 1995. Understanding windthrow: sylvicultural implications. For. Chron. 71: 434-445.
•
Schmidt, O. 2006. Wood and tree fungi. Biology, damage, protection and use. Berlin, Springer, 334p.
•
Stinson et al. 2011. An inventory-based analysis of Canada's managed forest carbon dynamics, 1990 to
2008. Global Change Biology 17: 1365-2486.
•
Strukelj, M., Brais, S., Quideau, S.A., Angers, V.A., Kebli, H., Drapeau, P. and Oh, S-W. 2013. Chemical
transformations in downed logs and snags of mixed boreal species during decomposition.
Can.J.For.Res.43:785-798.
Thank you!
Contact: julie.barrette@rncan.gc.ca