Authors
Robert Perlack, Douglas Karlen, Laurence Eaton, Anthony Turhollow, Matt Langholtz, Craig Brandt, Mark Downing, Robin Graham, Lynn Wright, Jacob Kavkewitz, Anna Shamey, Richard Nelson, Bryce Stokes, William Rooney, David Muth, J Richard Hess, Jared Abodeely, Chad Hellwinckel, Danial De La Torre Ugarte, Daniel Yoder, James Lyon, Timothy Rials, Timothy Volk, Thomas Buchholz, Lawrence Abrahamson, Robert Anex, Thomas Voigt, William Berguson, Don Riemenschneider, Jane Johnson, Robert Mitchell, Kenneth Vogel, Edward Richard, John Tatarko, Larry Wagner, Kenneth Skog, Patricia Lebow, Dennis Dykstra, Marilyn Buford, Patrick Miles, D Andrew Scott, James Perdue, Robert Rummer, Jamie Barbour, John Stanturf, David McKeever, Ronald Zalesny, Edmund Gee, P Daniel Cassidy, David Lightle
Publication date
2011/8/1
Description
The Report, Biomass as Feedstock for a Bioenergy and Bioproducts Industry: The Technical Feasibility of a Billion-Ton Annual Supply (generally referred to as the Billion-Ton Study or 2005 BTS), was an estimate of “potential” biomass within the contiguous United States based on numerous assumptions about current and future inventory and production capacity, availability, and technology. In the 2005 BTS, a strategic analysis was undertaken to determine if US agriculture and forest resources have the capability to potentially produce at least one billion dry tons of biomass annually, in a sustainable manner—enough to displace approximately 30% of the country’s present petroleum consumption. To ensure reasonable confidence in the study results, an effort was made to use relatively conservative assumptions. However, for both agriculture and forestry, the resource potential was not restricted by price. That is, all …
Total citations
Scholar articles
R Perlack, D Karlen, L Eaton, A Turhollow, M Langholtz… - 2011