Regional Biomass Feedstock Partnership Annual Review and Planning Meeting Crop-year 2010 San Antonio, Texas February 23 & 24

Challenge  Meeting renewable energy/products goals with sustainable production, collection, and distribution of sufficient quantities of lignocellulosic feedstock.  DOE/USDA billion ton study established the resource base at approximately 1.3 billion tons of biomass

SGI Regional Feedstock Workshops  Identified major feedstocks and projected potential sustainable supply within regions  2006 Southeast and North Central  2007 Western, South Central, and North East

SGI/DOE Partnership Development  Objectives Development of more accurate cost supply information and improved communication with partners in the feedstock supply chain  Replicated field trials across regions to determine the impact of residue removal on future grain yield.  Replicated filed trials to develop energy crops within geographical regions.  Regional assessment of feedstock resources which can be used to determine supply curves

Regional Feedstock Partnership Tasks 1. Biomass Resource Assessment Regional data bases on existing feedstock supply 2. Biomass Resource Development Field trials of dedicated feedstocks Impact of residue removal on sustainability 3. Education and Outreach BioWeb Regional Feedstock Partnership web site

Partnership Task Teams 1. Biomass Resource Assessment Mark Downing  NE – Peter Woodberry  SE – Sam Jackson  SC – Mark Gregory  NC -Mike Wimberly  W – Chris Daly 2. Sustainable Corn Residue Removal Doug Karlen

Partnership Task Teams 3. Sustainable Cereal Crop Residue Removal Russ Karow 4. Herbaceous Biomass Feedstock Development Vance Owens  CRP – DK Lee  Energy Cane – Brian Baldwin  Miscanthus – Tom Voit  Sorghum – William Rooney  Switchgrass – Vance Owens

Partnership Task Teams 5. Woody Biomass Feedstock Development Tim Rials  Poplar – Bill Berguson  Willow – Tim Volk 6. Education and Outreach Kim Cassel Sam Jackson

General Roles & Responisbilities  Field Plot PI Conduct field trial(s) & collect data Provide field trial data to data warehouse Analyze data from own field trial(s) and provide report

General Roles & Responisbilities  Species lead Facilitate sighting and data collection for all field plots for species Facilitate data uploading for species to data wharehouse Analyze/summarize data for species across the nation and report

General Roles & Responisbilities  Team Lead Coordinate activity/communication of team Primary contact with Project director Facilitate selection of species leads and plot locations Nation wide summarization/comparison of data between species on team and report

General Roles & Responisbilities  Regional GIS Coordinator Gather literature data from region and analyze it for their region. Augment data from species leads Upload garnered data to data warehouse Provide regional analysis of feedstocks within their region and report

DOE Funding of Partnership  Crop-Year 2008 FY07 - $4.5M  Crop-Year 2009 FY08 – $2.9M & FY09 - $2.0M = $4.9M $400K added sustainability data  Crop-Year 2010 FY10 - $4.9M budgeted  Crop-Years 2011 to 2013 Assumed to be as previous crop-years Plus 20% cost-share

Outcomes to date  Completed 2 crop-years of field trials at 59 locations in 37 states

Outcomes to date  Most data from 1 st crop-year uploaded to ORNL share-point.  Continued refinement of individual components of residue removal tool. Supported efforts of 5 modelers.  Regional GIS teams have compiled existing data resources and are beginning to analyze

Status of Crop-Year 2010 Funds  FY10 funds not yet awarded to SDSU  Team leads are assembling necessary paperwork “packets” to be forwarded to Project Director at SDSU – Due March 1 Only new field plots/PIs are completing NEPA  Crop-year 2010 funds will be disbursed as soon as awarded to SDSU and Sub-award approval clause released by DOE-GO

Outcomes for this Working Meeting  Update on each Task Team’s Crop-Year 2008/2009 results, activity, successes and obstacles.  Open discussion leading to possible revision and finalization of experimental plans for Crop-Year 2010  Continued dialog and coordination of activity among Task Teams (especially Resource Assessment), SGA, DOE, and USDA

Outcomes for this Working Meeting  Status check on progress toward stated objectives and desired outcomes  Dialog and potential solutions to issues identified over the past 2 crop-years and during this meeting.  Brainstorm and capture possible opportunities to expand and leverage the Feedstock Partnership.

Meeting Logistics  Agenda Skyline Atrium – working lunches Tango2 – whole group meetings  Working Lunches  Report presentations will be posted on the Feedstock Partnership web page.