Production and Use of Wood Kärhä FINAL.ppt [Read-Only]...Wood Energy Workshop - Belgrade, Serbia 3 Tuloskalvosarja Metsäteho Oy 09/01/2008 Surveys I 1. Supply Chains of Forest Chips

Wood Energy Workshop - Belgrade, Serbia 1Tuloskalvosarja

Metsäteho Oy 09/01/2008

ProductionProduction and and UseUse of Wood of Wood Chips: Chips: ImprovingImproving SupplySupply ChainsChains

Kalle KKalle KäärhrhääMetsMetsääteho Oy, Helsinki, Finlandteho Oy, Helsinki, Finland

[email protected]@metsateho.fi

Wood Energy Workshop26th–27th November 2007, Belgrade, Serbia



Contents

• Background:Metsäteho’s studies

• Supply chains in 2006:Logging residue chipsStump wood chipsChips from small-sized thinning wood

• Production machinery in 2007• Conclusions



Surveys I

1. Supply Chains of Forest Chips in Finland, 2006

March 2007

2. Visions of the Production and Use of Forest Chips in the Future in Finland

March-April 2007

3. Machinery for Forest Chip Production in Finland, 2007

May-August 2007



Surveys II

The major forest chip suppliers in Finland were involved in surveys; in alphabetical order:

Hyötypaperi Oy, Koskitukki Oy, L&T Biowatti Oy, Metsäliitto, Stora Enso Wood Supply Finland, Turveruukki Oy, UPM Forest, and Vapo Oy.



Surveys III

Total volume supplied in 2006 by the forest chip suppliers who participated in the surveys was 4.8 TWh.

4.86.1Total

− 1)0.3Chips from large-sized roundwood

0.61.4Chips from small-sized thinning wood

0.90.9Stump wood chips

3.33.5Logging residue chips

TWh

Total volume supplied by suppliers

Total volume used in Finland (Ylitalo 2007)

Type of forest chips

1) Chips from large-sized roundwood were not included in the surveys.



Optional chipping locations> Supply chains

• Harvesting site > Terrain chipping• Roadside landing > Roadside chipping• Terminal > Terminal chipping• Energy plant > Chipping at plant



SupplySupply chainschains in 2006in 2006> > LoggingLogging residueresidue chipschips



Norway spruce dominatedfinal felling sites

TypicalTypical removalremoval: 70: 70––110 110 MWhMWh/ha/ha



Cutting methods for recovering of logging residues

One side of strip road Both sides of strip road



Stacking of residues into large and high-quality piles

Higher productivity in harvestingHigher residue removalsLess impureness for residues



Terrain chipping 0%

Drawings: Juha Varhi

© Metsäteho Oy



Strengths & weaknesses of terrain chipping

Chipping and forest haulage with same unitSmall harvesting sitesSmall roadside storage spaceCleanliness of storage areas after harvesting operations

Ineffective chipping Uneven harvesting sitesSize of terrain chipper’s containerLong forwarding distancesUneven and muddy storage areasBreakdownsWinter conditions



Roadside chipping (Separate chipper & chip truck)

44%


© Metsäteho Oy



Strengths & weaknesses of roadside chipping (Separate chipper & chip truck)

FlexibilityConsiderable experience in roadside chippingAvailability of harvesting machinery

“Hot” chainUtilization rate of chipperLarge roadside storage space for residuesSmall and muddy storage areas for machinesUntidy roadside storage areas after harvesting operations



Roadside chipping (Integrated chipper–chip truck)

16%


© Metsäteho Oy



Strengths & weaknesses of roadside chipping (Integrated chipper–chip truck)

Chipping and long-distance transportation with same unitNo hot chainChips to several small plantsSmall harvesting sites

Small net load sizeLong transportation distancesLong-distance transportation costsLarge roadside storage space for residuesUntidy roadside storage areas after harvesting operations



Terminal chipping (Loose residues)

8%


© Metsäteho Oy



Terminal chipping (Bundled)

5%


© Metsäteho Oy



Strengths & weaknesses of terminal chipping

No hot chainGood quality management of chipsSecurity of chip deliveriesChips to several small plantsPlants with small storage fields or stocksSmall harvesting sitesEffective chippingWinter conditions

Establishment expenses of new terminalIdentifying appropriate terminal areasExtra handling timesRelatively high total supply chain costs



Chipping at plant (Loose residues)

12%


© Metsäteho Oy



Strengths & weaknesses of chipping at plant (Loose residues)

No hot chainLarge-scale productionPowerful comminutionMost cost-efficient supply chain with relatively short transportation distances

Energy content of loose residue loadsLong transportation distancesLong-distance transportation costsLarge roadside storage space and large storage fields at plants are requiredUntidy roadside storage areas after harvesting operations



Chipping at plant (Bundled)

14%


© Metsäteho Oy



Strengths & weaknesses of chipping at plant (Bundled)

No hot chainLarge-scale productionEffective forest haulageLow forest haulage costsSmall roadside storage spaceLong transportation distancesPowerful comminutionLow comminution costs

High bundling costsBundling strings when using slow-speed crushers



Supply chains of logging residue chips in Finland, 2004–2006

0102030405060708090

100

2004 2005 2006

Prop

ortio

n of

sup

ply

chai

n (%

) Chipping at plant (Loose)Chipping at plant (Bundled)Terminal chipping (Loose)Terminal chipping (Bundled)Roadside chipping (Int. chipper–chip truck)Roadside chipping (Sep. chipper & chip truck)Terrain chipping

Sources: Kärhä 2005–2007



Supply chains of logging residue chips in Finland, 2004–2006

0102030405060708090

100

2004 2005 2006

Prop

ortio

n of

sup

ply

chai

n (%





SupplySupply chainschains in 2006in 2006> > StumpStump woodwood chipschips



Norway spruce dominatedfinal felling sites




Terminal chipping 18%


© Metsäteho Oy



Chipping at plant 80%


© Metsäteho Oy



Supply chains of stump wood chips in Finland, 2004–2006

0102030405060708090

100

2004 2005 2006

Prop

ortio

n of

sup

ply

chai

n (%





SupplySupply chainschains in 2006in 2006> Chips > Chips fromfrom smallsmall--sizedsized woodwood



Manual cutting of small-diameter woodFelling-piling working method

Photos: TTS



Chainsaw equipped with a felling frameApuri and Reo felling frames

Photo: TTS



SmallSmall--diameterdiameter earlyearly thinningthinning standsstands




Removal in small-diameter earlythinning stands

Trees with a breast height diameter of 1–2 cm should not be harvested, and trees 3–4 cm can be harvested with consideration! Source: Kärhä et al. 2006

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

1-2 3-4 5-6 7-8 9-10

11-12

13-14

15-16

17-18 >1

8

Class of diameter at breast height (d1.3), cm

Prop

ortio

n of

har

vest

ed s

tem

s, %

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Prop

ortio

n of

cum

ulat

ive

rem

oval

, %

Harvested stems

Total removal



Harvesting systems of small-sized woodTwo-machine system


© Metsäteho Oy



Harvesting systems of small-sized woodTwo-machine system Harwarder system


© Metsäteho Oy



Roadside chipping (Separate chipper & chip truck)

69%


© Metsäteho Oy



Roadside chipping (Integrated chipper–chip truck)

4%


© Metsäteho Oy



Terminal chipping 24%


© Metsäteho Oy



Chipping at plant 3%


© Metsäteho Oy



Supply chains of chips from small-sizedthinning wood in Finland, 2004–2006

0102030405060708090

100

2004 2005 2006

Pro

porti

on o

f sup

ply

chai

n (%





Supply chains of chips from small-sizedthinning wood in Finland, 2004–2006

0102030405060708090

100

2004 2005 2006

Pro

porti

on o

f sup

ply

chai

n (%





ProductionProduction machinerymachinery in 2007in 2007



CuttingCutting smallsmall--sizedsized thinningthinning woodwood

180180



Harvester heads in cutting small-sized thinning wood

44 %

38 %

10 %

8 %

Felling head

Feeding harvester head with chain saw

Feeding harvester head with guillotine/shears

Feeding harvester head with chain saw +guillotine/shears

Source: Kärhä 2007



Productivity of whole-tree cutting

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Size of whole-tree stem, dm3

Prod

uctiv

ity, s

olid

m3 /e

ffect

ive

(E0)

hou

r

Felling head

Harvester head with feed rollers

The cross-cutting of large (tall) trees causes the difference in productivity!

Source: Kärhä et al. 2006



EnergyEnergy woodwood harwardersharwarders

5050



BundlingBundling

1313



StumpStump and and rootroot woodwood liftinglifting

120120



Stump lifting heads with splitting knife

Photos: A Hirvonen Oy, UPM Forest, Korsun Teräs Tmi

A Hirvonen Oy Steelpa Oy Korsun Teräs Tmi



Stump lifting heads without splitting knife

Photos: UPM Forest



Stump lifting heads in excavators

46 %

54 %

Stump lifting head with splitting knife

Stump lifting headwithout splitting knife




Weight of excavatorsusing different stump lifting heads

0

20

40

60

80

100

Stump lifting headwith splitting knife

Stump lifting headwithout splitting knife

Shar

e of

exc

avat

ors

(%)

20 –

<20 tons




ForestForest haulagehaulage of of energyenergy woodwood

350350



Forwarding loose residues Enlarged load space I



Forwarding loose residues Enlarged load space II



Forwarding residue bundles Enlarged load space



Forwarding residue bundles Standard forwarder



Effect of load size on forwarding costs

0

50

100

150

200

250

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

Forest haulage distance, m

Rel

ativ

e fo

rwar

ding

cos

ts, %

Loose residues / Standard(4.5 solid m3)

Loose residues / Enlarged(8.5 solid m3)

Residue bundles / Standard(5.5 solid m3)

Residue bundles / Enlarged(12.5 solid m3)

Sources: Rieppo 2002, Kärhä et al. 2004



Forwarding residues Residue (thorn) grapple



Mobile Mobile chipperschippers and and crusherscrushers

190190



FixedFixed stationarystationary crusherscrushers

Photo: UPM Forest66



VehiclesVehicles for for roadroad transportationtransportation of of energyenergy woodwood and and forestforest chipschips

190190



Long-distance transportation of loose residues

Photos: Metsäteho Oy, UPM Forest



Long-distance transportation of stumps

Photos: UPM Forest



Conclusions• Several factors determine which forest chip

supply chain is used:Harvesting conditions, Roadside landing capacities, Road transportation distances, Operating volumes and storage capacities of energy plants, Availability of production machinery, The type of forest chips produced and, The total supply chain costs.

• There is not any universal supply chain!!!



HvalaHvala mnogomnogo!!

Documents

Production and Use of Wood Kärhä FINAL.ppt [Read-Only]...Wood Energy Workshop - Belgrade, Serbia 3 Tuloskalvosarja Metsäteho Oy 09/01/2008 Surveys I 1. Supply Chains of Forest Chips