Regional Feedstock Partnership 2011 Switchgrass Report

Similar documents
Regional Feedstock Partnership 2010 Switchgrass Report

Sustainable production of switchgrass for bioenergy in the Great Plains and Midwest

Switchgrass in Québec

FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY

Double- and Relay- Cropping Systems for Oil and Biomass Feedstock Production in the North Central Region

Dedicated Herbaceous Perennial Energy Crops

Commercial-in-Confidence Ashton Old Baths Financial Model - Detailed Cashflow

TRAFFIC VOLUME TRENDS July 2002

The Production of Perennial Forages. Paul E. Nyren

2017 New York Alfalfa Yield Trials; Cornell University; J. Hansen and D. Viands

Table 1. Application timing, plant stage, environmental conditions. Date 5/27 6/21 7/7 Treatment

Switchgrass for ethanol and lipid production

Comparisons of PRE/POST Weed Control Programs in Field Corn at Rochester, MN in 2015

Cellulosic Biofuels and Energy Grasses Energy Policy Issues Committee March 21, 2012

Kentucky Silage Corn Hybrid Performance Report: 2010

TRAFFIC VOLUME TRENDS

Sequential Preemergence/Postemergence Herbicide Systems in Soybean for the Control of Giant Ragweed in Southeastern Minnesota in 2015.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CRW/Standard Efficacy Final Report 5 December 2011

Field Calibration of Woodruff, Mehlich and Sikora Buffer Tests for Determining Lime Requirement for Missouri soils

Biofuel Supply Chain Challenges and Analysis

Roundup Ready Trial Page 12

Achieving Energy Security and Greenhouse. Biomass Crop Assistance Program. Madhu Khanna

The effect of biomass moisture content on ethanol yields from steam pretreated lignocellulosics Renata Bura and Shannon Ewanick

Vunivau, Bua Province Vanua Levu, Fiji Solar Home System Design. Luis A. Vega, Ph.D.

Comparative Study on Enzymatic Digestibility of Upland and Lowland Switchgrass Varieties Processed by Leading Pretreatment Technologies

2017 Risk and Profit Conference Breakout Session Presenters. 13. Ethanol and Biodiesel Market and Profitability Prospects

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Quantifying Biomass Feedstock Variability Using the DOE Bioenergy Feedstock Library

FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY

Appendix E Water Supply Modeling

COMPARISON OF FIXED & VARIABLE RATES (25 YEARS) CHARTERED BANK ADMINISTERED INTEREST RATES - PRIME BUSINESS*

COMPARISON OF FIXED & VARIABLE RATES (25 YEARS) CHARTERED BANK ADMINISTERED INTEREST RATES - PRIME BUSINESS*

2015 New York Alfalfa Yield Trials; Cornell University; School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section

2013 / 2014 Revenue Comparison: OCTOBER

Regional Woody Biomass Feedstock Assessments. Woody Biomass Utilization Workshop Quincy, California May 25, 2010

National Routing Number Administration p-ani Activity and Projected Exhaust Report

Week Ending: Oct. 25, 2018

Task 1. Estimating Biomass Feedstock Production Potential

Design Criteria Data

Macroeconomic Outlook. Presented by Dr. Bruce A. Scherr Chairman of the Board Chief Executive Officer Emeritus

Sustainable Biofuels: Environmental Considerations

FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY

Pretreatment The Key Process Step World Congress on Industrial Biotechnology Montreal, June 18 th, 2013

SASKATOON STATION

2010 NEW YORK STATE SOYBEAN VARIETY YIELD TESTS. William J. Cox, Phil Atkins, and Mike Davis Dep. of Crop and Soil Sciences

Iowa Biodiesel Board Sept. 9, 2011 Gary Haer, VP, Sales and Marketing, REG Chairman, National Biodiesel Board. Copyright Renewable Energy Group

Total Production by Month (Acre Feet)

GoToBermuda.com. Q3 Arrivals and Statistics at September 30 th 2015

Silage Test Results. Summary of Evaluations of Corn Hybrids for Silage Blairsville, Athens, and Tifton, Georgia, 2017

UNIVERSITY OF IDAHO TWIN FALLS COUNTY 2013 SILAGE CORN VARIETY TRIALS. Steven L. Hines 1 ABSTRACT

EVALUATION OF NITROGEN PRODUCTS APPLIED ON PERENNIAL RYEGRASS DURING THE SPRING SEASON IN RIVERSIDE, CA SUBMITTED BY: SPONSORED BY: AND

Louisiana State University Department of Agronomy and Environmental Management. DuPont K4 Spring Timing Test

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

TREATMENT OF ONION BULBS WITH "SURROUND" TO REDUCE TEMPERATURE AND BULB SUNSCALD

Price Category Breakdown - February 2010

ARF07 PROJECT Optimization of Switchgrass Management for Commercial Fuel Pellet Production. Final Report DRAFT COPY. Presented to

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CVRP: Market Projections and Funding Needs

Switchgrass plot following the 2011 harvest at Central Grasslands Research Extension Center, Streeter, ND.

Science Applications International Corporation

GAZIFÈRE INC. Prime Rate Forecasting Process 2017 Rate Case

Longevity of turf response to urea, coated urea, and blends

Energy Conservation Efforts

WATER USE AND SUITABILITY OF JATROPHA CURCAS AS A BIOFUEL FEEDSTOCK CS Everson 1, M Mengistu 1 and M Gush 2

SOYBEAN OUTLOOK Midwest & Great Plains/Western Extension Summer Outlook Conference. St. Louis, Missouri

Project Title: Developing Stink Bug Thresholds for Late Maturity Group Soybeans on the Upper Gulf Coast. Beaumont, TX

Evaluating the impact of feedstock quality on delivered cost: Two case studies from the US Southeast region

Week Ending: Dec. 8, 2016

Off-station winter wheat cultivar performance on fallow in central Montana. D.M. Wichman CARC Research Agronomist, Moccasin, Montana.

2017 SC Producers Whole Farm Revenue Protection Expected Price Justification

METROPOLITAN COAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION LICENCE MONITORING SUMMARY

Kentucky yield projections for biofuel feedstock crops. Michael Bomford Community Research Service, Kentucky State University Land Grant Program

, NAS!?r-s~~if.{" WOQi2AN PIGS: FINAt:. EST'IHATES (STATISTICAL,,,", BULLETIN.) NATIONAL ' AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS SERVICE,, ':-'-"'-'-,,

Biofuels for Transportation

Design Criteria Data

2014 Meteorological and Oceanographic Summary for the Bocas del Toro Research Station. Prepared by: Steven Paton

Design Criteria Data

Speakers John S. Russin Vice Chancellor, LSU Agricultural Center Feedstock

Quality of Cotton Classed by State for the week ending - 1/3/2019 UPLAND

FIELD EXPERIMENT HISTORY

Economics and Yield of Dry Bean Market Classes

The Peoples Gas Light and Coke Company

State Policy Trends in Biomass

M onthly arket. Jan Table of Contents. Monthly Highlights

Progress on developing value-added uses for distillers grains: current and evolving opportunities

Renewable Fuel Standard Potential Economic and Environmental Effects of U.S. Biofuel Policy. Public Release October 4, 2011

Table 2. Evaluation of herbicide systems to control giant ragweed in soybeans at Rochester, MN in Pest Code AMBTR YIELD Pest Name Giant ragweed

2014 New York Alfalfa Yield Trials; Cornell University; School of Integrative Plant Science, Plant Breeding and Genetics Section

Glendale Water & Power Smart Grid Project

Giant foxtail was effectively control with all PRE/POST and total POST treatments, 99 percent control (9/21 rating date).

2013 Evaluation of In-Furrow and Foliar Fungicides for Disease Control in Peanut in Jay, Florida 1

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Dipartimento di Scienze Agronomiche Agrochimiche e delle Produzioni Animali Sezione Scienze Agronomiche

Breitenbach, Fritz R., Lisa M. Behnken, Jeffrey L. Gunsolus, Reed Searcy, and Jared Liebenow

Westland Monitor Farm Project

Up and Down Months of the Stock Market

Thirty Years of Climatological Data: 1969 to 1998

September 2016 Water Production & Consumption Data

Transcription:

Regional Feedstock Partnership 211 Switchgrass Report Vance Owens and Chang Oh Hong Indianapolis, IN13-15 March 212 Field trial PIs: D. Bransby and C. Hopkins (AL), E. Heaton (IA), R. Farris (OK), R. Mitchell (NE), D. Viands and H. Mayton (NY), J. Fike (VA) Sustainability Pis: C. Hong, S. Osborne, M. Lehman, D. Clay, T. Schumacher

Overall switchgrass objective Assess yield potential and quality parameters of switchgrass grown in different environments using standard agricultural practices

Long-term persistence Biomass yield (ton/ha) 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 Cave-In-Rock Year Sunburst 2 21 22 23 CIR DAC SBS

Switchgrass field trial locations and PIs 28 Alabama David Bransby, Carla Hopkins New York Don Viands, Hilary Mayton Oklahoma Rodney Farris South Dakota Vance Owens (sustainability site: Chang Oh Hong, Shannon Osborne ARS, Mike Lehman ARS, Tom Schumacher, Dave Clay) Virginia John Fike 29 Iowa Emily Heaton Nebraska Rob Mitchell ARS (without common treatments)

Switchgrass Trial Information Location Cultivar Planting Date Area (ha) Alabama Alamo May 21 7.3 Oklahoma Blackwell 2 Sep 28 7.3 New York Cave-In-Rock 29 May 28 4.9 South Dakota Sunburst 17 May 28 9.7 Virginia Alamo 1 July 28 6. Iowa Cave-In-Rock 8 May 29 7.3 Nebraska Shawnee 5 May 26 22.7

Field Trial Experimental Design Field scale (.4 to.8 ha experimental units) Four replicates across landscape Nitrogen (, 56, 112 kg ha -1 ) applied in 29 and 21 to all sites established in 28 or 29 NE location did not have N treatments Locally adapted cultivar at each location Planting at Ames, IA 8 May 29

Alabama Switchgrass common trial location diversity Oklahoma Virginia Iowa New York South Dakota

North Central Sunburst Alamo Maturity differences Sunburst Alamo

Southeast lowland/upland

Data collection Initial soil characteristics utilizing minimum soil data set Total organic carbon; soil ph; Total N; Bulk density; Soiltest P and K Yield using standard equipment Subsamples from plots for chemical characterization Samples from windrow and/or from bales have been sent to INL Samples are also being analyzed locally for other estimates of biomass quality Other

Switchgrass harvest dates in 29, 21, and 211 Location 29 Harvest 21 Harvest 211 Harvest Area (ha) Alabama NA NA 13 Oct. 7.3 Oklahoma 13 Nov. 28 Oct. 16 Dec. 7.3 New York 22 Oct. 2 Nov. 3 Nov. 4.9 South Dakota 28 Oct. 5 Nov. 3 Nov. 9.7 Virginia 1 Jan. 21 Jan. 211 18 Jan. 212 6. Iowa NA 18 Nov. 7 Nov. 7.3 Nebraska An/Re An/PF NA 22.7

Fertilizer application Bristol, SD 14 June 211 (7 ft boom)

Switchgrass establishment based on frequency method of Vogel and Masters (21) (OK exception) Frequency (Plants/m 2 ) Frequency (%) 1 9 3 8 7 6 25 5 4 3 2 2 1 15 9 8 7 1 6 5 4 5 3 2 1 29 21 29 21 SD VA 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 11256 112 N application N rate (kg (kg N ha N -1 ha ) -1 ) OK NY IA

Switchgrass establishment Bristol, SD 7 Aug. 29 Bristol, SD 12 Aug. 21 Bristol, SD 11 Aug. 211

Switchgrass harvest Virginia 21 Ithaca, NY 22 October 29 Bristol, SD 3 November 211 Virginia 21

Field scale operations (Bristol, SD in 21)

Switchgrass response to N at common treatment locations (IA, NY, OK, SD, VA) and harvest timing at NE Yields ranged from ~2 to 11 Mg ha -1 across common treatment locations and years Initial soil nitrogen (g kg -1 ) -5 cm 5-15 cm 15-3 cm SD 1.93 1.55 1.4 NY 3.2 2.29 1.8 IA 2.53 2.26 1.86 OK 2.39 1.68 1.17 VA 1.12.55.41 Field Scale Yield (Nebraska) (Mg/ha) Year Anthesis Post-Frost Regrowth 26-5.6-27 7.4 8.7 4.5 28 13.5 1.1 2.2 29 11.2-2.9 21 11.7 1.8 - Biomass yield (Mg ha -1 ) Biomass yield (Mg ha -1 ) Biomass yield (Mg ha -1 ) 13 12 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 13 12 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 b b 29 21 211 Average across years SD 56 112 56 112 a a IA OK 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 ) a a 13 12 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 13 12 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 a NY 56 112 b N application rate (kg N ha -1 ) VA 56 112 b a b a

Visual effect of N (SD in mid July 21) 112 56 112 56

Switchgrass biomass characteristics Sample collection at each location INL Local analysis Total N Neutral detergent fiber (NDF) and acid detergent fiber (ADF) used to estimate cellulose and hemicellulose Acid detergent lignin (ADL) Ash

N concentration in harvested switchgrass at each location N concentration (g N kg -1 ) 12 1 8 6 4 2 b 29 21 b a SD c b a NY 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N concentration (g N kg -1 ) 12 1 8 6 4 2 IA OK VA 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 )

Total N removal based on switchgrass production at each location Total N removal (kg N ha -1 ) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 29 21 SD NY Total N removal (kg N ha -1 ) 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 56 112 56 112 IA 56 112 56 112 OK VA 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 )

Fertilizer N removal by switchgrass at each location Fertilized N removal (kg N ha -1 ) 2 15 1 5-5 -1-15 Fertilized N removal (kg N ha -1 ) 2 15 1 5-5 -1-15 29 21 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 IA SD N application rate (kg N ha -1 ) 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 OK NY 56 112 56 112 VA

Apparent N recovery by switchgrass at each location Apparent N recovery (%) 3 29 21 2 1-1 SD NY -2 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 3 IA OK VA Apparent N recovery (%) 2 1-1 -2 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 )

Switchgrass N use efficiency at each location NUE (kg biomass kg N -1 ) 6 5 4 3 2 1-1 29 21 SD NY NUE (kg biomass kg N -1 ) 6 5 4 3 2 1-1 -2 56 112 56 112 IA 56 112 56 112 OK VA -2 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 )

Cellulose concentration in harvested switchgrass at each location Cellulose (g kg -1 ) 5 29 21 b 4 3 2 1 a b SD a b c NY 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 Cellulose (g kg -1 ) 5 4 3 2 1 IA OK VA 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 )

Hemicellulose concentration in harvested switchgrass at each location Hemicellulose (g kg -1 ) 4 3 2 1 Hemicellulose (g kg-1) 4 3 29 21 b SD a ab a b c 2 1 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 IA OK VA a b ab 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha-1) NY

Lignin concentration in harvested switchgrass at each location Lignin (g kg -1 ) 1 8 6 4 2 29 21 SD b ab a NY Lignin (g kg -1 ) 1 8 6 4 2 56 112 56 112 IA 56 112 56 112 OK a ab b VA 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 )

Ash concentration in harvested switchgrass at each location Ash (g kg -1 ) 2 16 12 8 4 a 29 21 ab b a b b SD NY 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 2 IA a OK VA Ash (g kg -1 ) 16 12 8 4 b ab ab a b 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 56 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 )

Ethanol (L Mg -1 biomass, left; L ha -1, right) using simultaneous saccharification and fermentation 24 29 21 2 22 2 18 29 21 Ethanol (L Mg -1 DM) 16 12 8 Ethanol yield (L ha -1 ) 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 4 2 SD NY IA OK VA SD NY IA OK VA

Ethanol yield 22 2 29 21 18 Ethanol yield (L ha -1 ) 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 SD NY IA OK VA

Theoretical ethanol yield (L Mg -1 biomass, left; L ha -1, right) from all biomass sugars 5 5 29 21 45 29 21 Ethanol (L Mg -1 DM) 4 3 2 1 Theoretical ethanol yield (L ha -1 ) 4 35 3 25 2 15 1 5 SD NY IA OK VA SD NY IA OK VA

Theoretical ethanol yield 5 45 29 21 Theoretical ethanol yield (L ha -1 ) 4 35 3 25 2 15 1 5 SD NY IA OK VA

Harvest date and storage effects on switchgrass dry matter loss stored 12 months (NE) Bale & Storage August DM Loss Post Frost DM Loss Mean DM Loss Square (%) (%) (%) Open 37.8 42.5 4.2 Covered 4.9 2.7 3.8 Barn 11.8 5.9 Round 3x Open 13. 6.5 Covered 5.1 2.6 Barn 2.5 1.3 Round 4x Open 1.5 2.4 6.5 Covered 5.4 2.7 Barn 3.6.9 2.3

Switchgrass harvest (SD-211, top; NY-21, bottom)

Switchgrass root characteristics Switchgrass roots (right) in a Typic Fragiudept soil and root development in cool season grass alleyway (left) (NY).

Switchgrass root sampling (Bristol, SD) Switchgrass sampled at anthesis (August) Two cores within row Two cores between rows Soil sampling depths (cm) -15 15-3 3-45 45-6 6-1

Switchgrass root biomass at various depths the year after establishment (Bristol, SD) Root biomass (Mg ha -1 )..5 1. 1.5 2. 2.5 3. Soil depth (cm) 15 3 45 6 29 N rate kg N ha -1 N rate 112 kg N ha -1 1..5 1. 1.5 2. 2.5 3. 15 Soil depth (cm) 3 45 6 211 1

Total switchgrass root/shoot biomass ratio (Bristol, SD) 29 211 Biomass (Mg ha -1 ) 14 13 12 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 Total root biomass at 1 m depth Shoot biomass.3.29 112 Biomass (Mg ha -1 ) 14 13 12 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1.34.43 112 N application rate (kg N ha -1 ) N application rate (kg N ha -1 )

Total soil nitrogen (Bristol, SD) Year 29 21 211 N rate (kg/ha) Soil depth (cm) -5 5-15 15-3 3-6 6-1 T-N (g/kg) 2.15 1.9 1.46.97.62 56 1.94 1.75 1.48.96 1.6 112 1.97 1.86 1.37.86.6 LSD.5 2.31 1.94 1.42 1.1.66 56 2.35 1.97 1.55 1.1.85 112 2.39 1.87 1.45 1.1.69 LSD.5 2.11 1.78 1.54.92.63 56 2.23 1.94 1.56 1.5.68 112 2.23 1.78 1.45.93.59 LSD.5

Leachate sampling from lysimeters placed 1 m deep (Bristol, SD)

Monthly NO 3 concentration in leacheate collected from lysimeters placed 1 m deep (Bristol, SD) NO3 concentration (mg L -1 ) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 29 Aug. Sep. Oct. 4. 3.5 3. 2.5 2. 1.5 1..5. 21 N kg N ha -1 N 56 kg N ha -1 N 112 kg N ha -1 Jun. Jul. Sep. Oct. Nov. Month 211 May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct.

Cumulative NO 3 leaching during growing season (Bristol, SD) Cumulative NO3 leaching (kg N ha -1 ) 22 2 18 16 14 12 1 29 56 112 21 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 56 112 Nitrogen application rate (kg N ha -1 ) 211 56 112

Monthly DOC concentration in leachate (Bristol, SD) 29 21 211 DOC concentration (mg L -1 ) 16 14 12 1 8 6 4 2 N kg N ha -1 N 112 kg N ha -1 Aug. Sep. Oct. Jun. Jul. Sep. Oct. a b Jun. Aug. Sep. Oct. Month

CO 2 flux static chamber with readings every 2 min. (Bristol, SD)

CO 2 flux during growing season (29-211) CO 2 flux (g CO2 m -2 d -1 ) 24 2 16 12 8 4 7/1/9 8/1/9 9/1/9 1/1/9 11/1/9 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 5/1/11 6/1/11 7/1/11 8/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/11 11/1/11 29 21 211 Cumulative CO 2 flux (29-211) Cumulative CO 2 flux (g CO2 m -2 ) 15 14 13 12 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 7/1/9 8/1/9 9/1/9 1/1/9 11/1/9 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 29 21 5/1/11 6/1/11 7/1/11 8/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/11 11/1/11 211

Cumulative CO 2 flux (29-211) Cumulative CO 2 flux (g CO2 m -2 ) 15 14 13 12 11 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 7/1/9 8/1/9 9/1/9 1/1/9 11/1/9 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 29 21 5/1/11 6/1/11 7/1/11 8/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/11 11/1/11 211

CO 2 flux measured every two weeks for each N treatment in 21 (Bristol, SD) CO 2 flux (point measurement) Cumulative CO 2 flux CO 2 flux (kg C ha -1 day -1 ) 14 kg N ha -1 12 1 8 6 4 2 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha -1 Cumulative CO 2 flux (kg CO 2 -C ha -1 ) 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 kg N ha -1 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha -1 5/1/1 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21 5/1/1 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21

CO 2 flux measured every two weeks for each N treatment in 21 (Bristol, SD) 14 kg N ha -1 12 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha -1 CO 2 flux (kg C ha -1 day -1 ) 1 8 6 4 2 5/1/1 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21

Cumulative CO 2 flux for each N treatment in 21 (Bristol, SD) Cumulative CO 2 flux (kg CO 2 -C ha -1 ) 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 kg N ha -1 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha -1 5/1/1 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21

Daily soil temperature (top) and moisture (bottom) at a 5-cm depth during growing season in South Dakota 3 Soil temperature ( o C) 25 2 15 1 5 Soil moisture content (m 3 water m -3 soil) 7/1/9 8/1/9 9/1/9 1/1/9 11/1/9 29.45.4.35.3.25.2.15.1.5. 7/1/9 8/1/9 9/1/9 1/1/9 11/1/9 29 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 5/1/11 6/1/11 7/1/11 8/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/11 11/1/11 21 211 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/111/1/1 6/1/11 7/1/11 8/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/11 11/1/11 21 211

Daily soil moisture (5 cm) during growing season in South Dakota Soil moisture content (m 3 water m -3 soil).45.4.35.3.25.2.15.1.5. 7/1/9 8/1/9 9/1/9 1/1/9 11/1/9 29 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21 6/1/11 7/1/11 8/1/11 9/1/11 1/1/11 11/1/11 211

N 2 O and CH 4 measurements (Bristol, SD)

Cumulative N 2 O (left) and CH 4 (right) flux in 21 in SD. Values are averaged across summit and toeslope landscape positions. N 2 O flux (g N 2 O-N ha -1 ) 5 kg N ha -1 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha 4-1 3 2 1 Cumulative CH 4 flux (g CH 4 -C ha -1 ) 6 5 4 3 2 1 kg N ha -1 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha -1 May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. 21 5/1/1 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21

Biweekly N 2 O flux (Bristol, SD) N 2 O flux (g N ha -1 day -1 ) 1 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1-1 kg N ha -1 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha -1 5/1/1 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21

Cumulative N 2 O flux (Bristol, SD) N 2 O flux (g N 2 O-N ha -1 ) 5 kg N ha -1 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha 4-1 3 2 1 May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. 21

Biweekly CH 4 flux (Bristol, SD) 1 8 kg N ha -1 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha -1 CH 4 flux (g C ha -1 day -1 ) 6 4 2-2 -4 5/1/1 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21

Cumulative CH 4 flux (Bristol, SD) 6 Cumulative CH 4 flux (g CH 4 -C ha -1 ) 5 4 3 2 1 kg N ha -1 56 kg N ha -1 112 kg N ha -1 5/1/1 6/1/1 7/1/1 8/1/1 9/1/1 1/1/1 11/1/1 21

Major challenges thus far Establishment (AL) Weather/field conditions Economics

Outputs and outcomes Outputs Publications/presentations Professional meetings KDF input extension Farm Energy CoP Outcomes Improved C and N budgets for switchgrass (limited) Increased understanding of technical and economic feasibility of switchgrass for bioenergy across US Improved understanding of environmental implications and potential difficulties associated with growing switchgrass for bioenergy

212 tentative plans All sites will apply treatments and harvest biomass Biomass chemical composition Continue sustainability work at SD location Manuscripts prepared/submitted Two submissions to 212National Sun Grant Conference

Location-year data available at end of 212 if all common treatment sites (AL, IA, NY, OK, SD, VA) are able to harvest Location-years including establishment year 29 with crop failures (2) 27 without crop failures Location-years excluding establishment year = 21 Establishment years = 6 to 8 Crop failures = 2

Funding, activities, and KDF for 212-213 Appreciation for funding that got us to this point All sites will apply treatments and harvest biomass Biomass chemical composition Continue sustainability work at SD location 211 data to KDF (in SD now) Manuscripts prepared/submitted Two abstracts to 212 National Sun Grant Conference Location 212 Harvest 213 Soil sample AL Yes No IA No No NY No No OK No No SD Yes Yes VA Yes No

Funding, activities, and KDF for 212-213 All sites will apply treatments and harvest biomass Biomass chemical composition Continue sustainability work at SD location 211 data to KDF (in SD now) Manuscripts prepared/submitted Two abstracts to 212 National Sun Grant Conference Location 212 Harvest 213 Soil sample $ needed to complete AL Yes No $15, IA No No $21, NY No No $11,1 OK No No $15, SD Yes Yes $1,* VA Yes No $16,6 Total $88,7