COMPARATIVE STUDY OF WOOD FUEL SUPPLY CHAINS IN RUSSIAN KARELIA

Biomass is one of the most promising renewable energy sources that could contribute to sustainable energy supply including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Russia has a huge potential for producing biofuel from wood raw materials. However, forest bioenergy is now at the first steps of deve...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inInternational Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference : SGEM Vol. 18; no. 4.1; pp. 227 - 234
Main Authors Sokolov, Anton, Syunev, Vladimir
Format Conference Proceeding
LanguageEnglish
Published Sofia Surveying Geology & Mining Ecology Management (SGEM) 01.01.2018
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Biomass is one of the most promising renewable energy sources that could contribute to sustainable energy supply including the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Russia has a huge potential for producing biofuel from wood raw materials. However, forest bioenergy is now at the first steps of development. In this regard, the problem of effective choice of the suitable wood fuel supply chain is very significant. A toolset of decision support systems for wood harvesting and forest bioenergy logistics has been developed as a possible way to solve this problem. The toolset contains several optimization tools, including the routing and scheduling of roundwood and energy wood harvesting teams, the sequencing of harvest areas, the estimation of available forest biomass potential of harvesting sites, and the planning of forest road networks. The approbation of this system at the one of Russian Karelia wood harvesting company for effective use of woody biomass and logging residues are described in the article. Four methods of wood fuel harvesting, which are often used in our country and abroad, were chosen and for each of them the computer simulation was carried out using a toolset of decision support systems. At the list of the methods were included: roadside chipping method (logging residues only), roadside chipping method (logging residues and firewood), terminal chipping method and the bundling method. Then the methods has been compared using technical and economic indicators.
ISSN:1314-2704
DOI:10.5593/sgem2018/4.1/S17.030