You are on page 1of 11

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier.

The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elseviers archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright

Author's personal copy


b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

Available at www.sciencedirect.com

http://www.elsevier.com/locate/biombioe

Quantification of the residual biomass obtained from pruning


of trees in Mediterranean olive groves
B. Velazquez-Mart a,*, E. Fernandez-Gonzalez a, I. Lopez-Cortes b,
D.M. Salazar-Hernandez b
a
b

Departamento de Ingeniera Rural y Agroalimentaria, Camino de Vera s/n. 46022 Valencia, Spain
Departamento de Produccion Vegetal, Universidad Politecnica de Valencia, Camino de Vera s/n. 46022 Valencia, Spain

article info

abstract

Article history:

This research quantified the available residual biomass obtained from pruning olive trees.

Received 22 October 2009

The additional biomass quantified could be used as a source of energy or as raw material for

Received in revised form

the wood industry and would provide additional income for fruit producers and also a more

18 April 2011

sustainable system. Several factors were analyzed: Variety, aim of the pruning, age of the

Accepted 22 April 2011

plants, size of the plantation, crop yield and irrigation. Regression models were also calcu-

Available online 25 May 2011

lated to predict the weight of dry biomass obtained per tree and tonnes of dry biomass
obtained per hectare according to the significant factors. These equations could implement

Keywords:

logistic planning as the Borvemar model, which defines a logistics network for supplying bio-

Borvemar model

energy systems. Olive tree varieties were classified into two groups for annual pruning: high

Biomass supply

residual biomass productivity (average yield 10.5 kg dry biomass tree1) and low productivity

Biomass logistics

(average yield 3.5 kg dry biomass tree1). Some varieties are in transition between the two

Biomass assessment

groups. There are no differences in biennial pruning, reaching an average residual biomass of

Ligneous biomass

33 kg tree1. This means that in Mediterranean areas the residual biomass from olive pruning

Energy wood

reaches an average 1.31 t ha1 in annual pruning and 3.02 t ha1 in biennial pruning.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1.

Introduction

Large quantities of ligneous biomass can be obtained from the


pruning operations carried out in Mediterranean fruit plantations [1]. These residues can be used as a source of energy
and also has other industrial uses [2]. In order to be used as an
energy source it has to be transformed by diverse physical or
chemical processes into solid, liquid or gaseous biofuels [3]. At
present these residues are usually destroyed by in-field
burning or crushing onto the soil, so there is no direct
economic benefit [4] but collecting this additional biomass to
use as a source of energy or raw material for the wood
industry could provide additional economic benefits to fruit
producers and also amortization of management operations

within the framework of sustainable utilization. To date, the


biomass produced in fruit plantations has not been used to
produce bio-energy because of unsolved technical problems
in harvesting or lack of information on the quantity and
quality of the residues. Sometimes the most expensive costs
of the chain biomass utilization are located in the harvesting
and logistics operations. Knowing the amount of residual
biomass available in each type of orchard allows planning
logistics operations and achieving a cheaper supply chain.
Many logistic models have been developed to determine the
best alternative for supplying bio-energy systems, including
the Bioloco Model (Biomass Logistics Computer Optimization)
[5,6] and Borvemar Moldel [7]. By means of purpose-built
computer models, either one specific objective can be

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: borvemar@dmta.upv.es (B. Velazquez-Mart).
0961-9534/$ e see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.biombioe.2011.04.042

Author's personal copy


b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

optimized by linear programming or several heterogeneous


objectives can be combined by applying goal programming:
maximize profits, minimize costs, minimize greenhouse gas
emissions, maximize energy returns, minimize energy use,
and maximize energy profit [8]. These parameters are cost data
(e.g. transport costs per km, pre-treatment costs and energy
conversion costs) along with capacity constraints or parameters such as storage losses or seasonal variations in supply or
demand. To be able to combine GIS spatial studies with linear
programming models it is necessary to build a network from
a digital map [8]. The Borvemar model is a mathematical
calculation method to select the actual points on the map at
which biomass can be collected and which can subsequently
be considered as biomass sources in a network model [7]. The
algorithm provides the location of points where biomass can
be concentrated with a minimum amount of available biomass
and a limited area. Therefore the amount of biomass in every
plot in an area must be studied to apply the method. These
biomass source points should be connected with the other
possible consumption points (e.g. power plants). Using these
concepts, a network structure can be built. Optimization of the
selection of the source points to supply the power plants can
therefore be solved by linear programming of the structured
network from a digital map.
The input data for the construction of digital maps with
spatial distribution of available biomass requires quantification studies for all crops. Time and cost of technology for
collecting the biomass are also necessary for planning the
logistics. The analysis of the supply chain of biomass can be as
shown in Fig. 1 [9].
The available residual biomass obtained from pruning
operations in olive trees in Phase 1 was quantified in this
work. The collecting systems for these materials had already
been presented by Velazquez and Fernandez (2009) [10]. The
additional biomass quantified could be used as a source of
energy or as raw material for the wood industry, providing
additional income for fruit producers and also a more environmentally sustainable system [11].

2.

Materials and methods

Quantification of the biomass that can be obtained from


different crops depends on the agricultural system used. This

3209

study investigated the quantity of residual biomass available


from normal pruning of olive trees. The area studied was on
the Spanish Mediterranean coast and included the provinces
of Catalonia, Valencia, Murcia, Albacete and southwest
Andalucia. The procedure of each trial consisted of the
selection of significant number of plots with different
combinations of factors that can influence the residues
generated: variety, type of formation, conditions of irrigation,
age and size of the plant. Table 1 shows the factors studied
and their different levels.
Depending on the technical criteria, olive trees can be
pruned annually or biennially. The biennial pruning, that is
carried out every two years, nevertheless it is less recommendable by the several researchers than annual pruning, is
still practiced by a lot of producers for decreasing the
economic investment [12]. Therefore, annual and biennial
pruning were treated separately in the analysis. Between 8
and 10 trees were selected for analysis from each of 238 plots.
Some plots had several varieties. The number of trees to
sample in each plot depended on plot sizes and the number of
varieties cultivated.
Previous to pruning, the following data were determined:
- Plantation Data: Variety, rootstock, age of the plantation,
fruit yield, irrigation or no irrigation, year of the last pruning
and aim of the pruning
- Tree Data: Trunk diameter, diameter of crown, distance
from soil to crown, and height of the tree.
After pruning, bundles of the residual materials were
weighed by means of a dynamometer. Mass measurement in
the field was carried out with moist materials for each
sampled tree. Five branches of each tree were manually
defoliated and weighed to determine the percentage mass of
leaves and wood. Samples of wood were then put into plastic
containers to measure moisture content and to calculate dry
ligneous biomass of all pruned materials. The moisture
content wet basis was measured for each sampled orchard.
From this value the dry matter was calculated for each tree.
From the distance between the trees (space of plantation) and
the average biomass obtained for each variety in each
orchard, the amount of dry biomass per hectare was estimated. The evolution of the drying process was studied under
two types of conditions: open-air drying at an average

Fig. 1 e Phases of the biomass supply chain analysis.

Author's personal copy


3210

b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

Table 1 e Factors and levels analyzed for the


quantification of pruned biomass in olive trees.
Factor

Number
of levels

Levels

Variety

12

Manzanilla, Picual, Cornicabra,


Royal, Blanqueta, Villalonga,
Marons, Farga, Serrana, Franotio,
Grossal, Arbequina and Regnes.
< 66 m2
66 < x < 102 m2
> 102 m2
< 5 t ha1
5 < x < 10 t ha1
> 10 t ha1
< 10 years
10 < x < 40 years
> 40 years
Shaping
Production
Annual
Biennial
Rejuvenation
No irrigation
Irrigated

Tree growing space

Fruit yield

Age

Aim of pruning

Pruning intensity

Irrigation

temperature of 17  C and relative humidity of 35%; and stovedried at 105  C. Daily measurements of both types were
carried out until the weight of the samples was stabilized.

presented according to the type of pruning practiced in the


different plots. Table 2 gives the average results obtained in
the quantification of the residual biomass for different varieties in annual and biennial pruning. It can be noted that leaves
formed 48% of the weight of all material pruned before drying.
The average values obtained for dry matter and matter after
cutting are shown in the Table 2. The average moisture
content of materials after cutting is 40.79% as wet basis. The
averages and dispersions obtained on comparing all the trees
analyzed are shown in Table 3. These results can be compared
with those of other studies carried out on olive trees. Romero
et al. (2007) [13] obtained average values for residually damp
wood of around 3 t ha1 generated in annual pruning (low
intensity pruning); and 6 t ha1 in high intensity or biennial
pruning. The results obtained in our trials were smaller, but
nevertheless were in harmony with the data obtained by Di
Blasi in 1997 [14], who quantified 2.2 t per hectare of damp
residues olive trees. In 2007 Spinelli et al. [15] also obtained
2 t ha1. These authors did not analyze the influence of the
variety or the other factors in the production of residual
biomass from olive trees.
The moisture content evolution under two types of
conditions studied, are shown in the Fig. 2. It can be seen that
the minimum moisture content achieved in open air is 20%
after 25 days. Nevertheless, the material are completely dried
in 5 day in oven conditions.

3.1.

3.

Results and discussion

The results of the quantification of the residual biomass


obtained from annual and biennial pruning of olive trees are
presented. The frequency of pruning has a strong influence on
the quantity of biomass produced, and therefore on the
quantity of pruning material. The results obtained are

The variety factor

All the varieties were compared statistically by means of


analysis of variance. The results obtained from the ANOVA
and the groups of homogeneous varieties of the residual
biomass obtained from the pruning are shown in Table 4. The
varieties that did not have significant differences are identified with an X in the same position. In Table 4 the varieties are
ordered from smaller to greater quantities of residues

Table 2 e Biomass quantified from olive tree pruning.


Variety

Annual
Pruning

Biennial
Pruning

Arbequina
Blanqueta
Cornicabra
Frantoio
Grossal
Manzanilla
Picual
Royal
Serrana
Villalonga
Cornicabra
Farga
Manzanilla
Marons
Morrat
Regnes
Royal

Number
sampled
trees
127
128
126
124
125
127
132
123
128
129
125
126
131
125
123
120
123

Materials after cutting

Dried material without leaves

kg biomass with
leaves tree1

kg biomass without
leaves tree1

kg dry matter tree1

t dry matter ha1

20.651
28.765
16.254
8.006
4.399
37.800
39.091
9.850
33.645
15.218
52.000
131.41
79.700
172.22
111.283
78.173
43.100

10.876
14.771
8.403
4.239
2.174
19.443
20.309
5.192
17.294
7.167
26.384
67.439
41.205
89.138
57.433
40.315
22.183

6.271
8.735
4.936
2.431
1.336
11.479
11.871
2.991
10.218
4.621
15.792
39.907
24.204
52.301
33.795
23.740
13.089

1.003
1.549
0.589
0.724
0.371
2.050
1.317
0.437
2.838
1.540
1.381
2.985
3.530
4.590
2.948
1.727
1.309

Author's personal copy


3211

b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

Table 3 e Mean and standard deviation of the trees analyzed.


Type of
pruning

Average weight of
damp wood t ha1

Stn. Dev. damp weight per ha

Average weight dried wood


t ha1

Stn. Dev.
dry weight per ha

Annual
Biennial

2.312
4.520

1.504
2.646

1.305
3.025

0.883
1.555

It should be pointed out that some transition varieties,


such as Arbequina and Royal produced results that overlapped both groups.
In the biennial group, there were no significant differences
between the varieties with respect to the residues obtained.
The fact that significant differences in residual biomass
appeared between the varieties in the annual pruning but not
in the biennial pruning means that if all varieties have sufficient time to develop they will reach similar size.
Fig. 2 e Moisture content evolution under two types of
conditions studied.

produced from pruning. In the annual pruning, the varieties


can be classified in two groups:
a) The first group of the highest residues, which includes: the
Blanqueta, Serrana, Manzanilla, and Picual varieties.
b) The second group of the lowest residues: containing the
Grosal, Frantoio, Villalonga and Conicabra varieties.

3.2.

Allocation of growing space per tree

The most common olive tree growing spaces are 88 m2,
1010 m2 and 1212 m2 and these were the three sizes
studied. The categories chosen were: Lower than 66 m2(num.
trees 710, num. plots 79), between 66 and 102 m2 (num. trees
714, num. plots 79), and greater than 102 m2 (num. trees 718,
num. plots 80). In Fig. 3, the result obtained in the ANOVA LSD
intervals are depicted. When the residual biomass obtained in
annual pruning was evaluated, significant differences did not
exist for the sizes studied; nevertheless, in biennial pruning
we found that growing spaces greater than 103 m2 produced

Fig. 3 e LSD intervals at 95% level of confidence in the influence of plantation size in residual biomass generated by pruning
of olive trees.

Author's personal copy


3212

b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

Table 4 e Contrast multiple of the residual biomass yielded by each variety in annual and biennial pruning.

Annual
Pruning

Biennial
Pruning

Variety

Dry wood yield per tree


kg tree1

Sigma LSD

Grossal
Frantoio
Villalonga
Cornicabra
Arbequina
Blanqueta
Royal
Serrana
Manzanilla
Picual

1.335
2.431
4.621
5.281
6.271
8.735
9.049
10.217
11.479
11.851

1.310
1.310
1.310
1.400
1.657
0.926
1.657
1.310
2.139
11.657

X
X
X

Cornicabra
Regues
Manzanilla
Morruda
Farga
Morons

16.000
23.739
24.203
33.795
39.907
52.300

16.498
8.249
11.665
9.525
7.380
8.249

X
X
X
X
X

statistically more residual biomass per tree and hectare than


those under 66 m2. On the other hand, there were no significant differences when they were compared with the intermediate size (between 67 and 102 m2). In spite of the fact that
groves with smaller growing areas had a greater number of
plants per hectare, the biomass obtained in these was not
significantly larger, because the development of each tree is
influenced by the separation with its neighbours. Among
closely separated trees there is increased competition for
water, nutrients and light. This makes for slower tree growth
and consequently lower production of residual biomass.
Larger separation provides bigger crowns and therefore
greater residual biomass per tree. In this respect, the olive tree
is different to other species of fruit trees, for which a greater
number of plants per hectare leads to greater residual
biomass.

3.3.

Age of the trees

Due to the longevity of this species, three age intervals were


selected to verify whether significant differences exist in the
production of residual biomass. The levels analyzed were:
Trees younger than 10 years old (num. trees 719, num. plots 80),
trees between 10 and 40 years old (num. trees 711, num. plots 79),
and trees older than 40 years (num. trees 712, num. plots 79). The
LSD intervals obtained from the ANOVA analysis are shown in
Fig. 4. The trees younger than 10 years old have been missed in
the biennial pruning because they always are pruned every
year.As can be observed, significant differences exist among
the age levels studied. When the quantity of biomass obtained
from each tree is compared according to the age levels chosen,
it can be seen that the trees which generated the greatest
quantity of residual biomass were those older than 40 years,
both in annual and biennial pruning. Nevertheless, the
quantity of biomass from these trees showed no statistical
differences with respect to trees between 10 and 40 years old.
When the production of biomass per hectare is analyzed
for annual pruning, trees older than 40 years produce the
greatest amount of dry biomass per hectare (2.3 t ha1),

Homogeneous Groups

X
X
X
X

X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X

X
X
X
X
X

showing significant differences with trees younger than 40


years (1.4 t ha1 and 0.8 t ha1). This occurred because the
older trees in this group were planted closer together, so that
when the production of residual biomass is calculated per
hectare, a higher amount is obtained, even though the
biomass generated per tree is lower. Furthermore, in the
biennial pruning, there was no difference in the tons of dry
matter produced per hectare. In this case, a longer growth
time means that the residual biomass generated is not influenced by the different separation among the older trees.

3.4.

Aim of pruning

There are three possible aims in pruning: shape pruning,


regular pruning, and rejuvenation. The following analysis
compares the amount of residual biomass produced in annual
old (num. trees 379, num. plots 42) and biennial regular
pruning old (num. trees 890, num. plots 99) with rejuvenation
pruning old (num. trees 873, num. plots 97). The results show
that rejuvenation pruning generates the largest amount of
biomass (42 kg tree1, 3.52 t ha1). After rejuvenation pruning,
biennial pruning (33 kg tree1, 3.02 t ha1) produces more
biomass than annual regular pruning (6.23 kg tree-1,
1.31 t ha1). This occurs because rejuvenation pruning
removes all the old branches at the top of the tree. Only the
primary branches are not cut, so that the trimmed branches in
rejuvenation pruning are usually thicker and heavier than in
other types of pruning. The results obtained were as expected
(Fig. 5).

3.5.

Fruit production

The olive trees whose average crop production was higher


than 10 t ha1 had the greatest amount of residual biomass in
annual pruning. Fruit production is highly related to the
quantity of branches that produce fruit, and therefore produce
a greater quantity of biomass to be eliminated in pruning,
which is carried out after harvesting, especially when the tree
has had a high fruit yield, in order to prevent the tree from

Author's personal copy


b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

3213

Fig. 4 e LSD intervals for the "age" factor in the amount of residual biomass from olive tree pruning at 95% level of
confidence.

bearing another crop. Nevertheless in biennial pruning


significant differences did not exist among plantations at
different levels of production. This is due to the fact that
during the long growth period many branches have to be
removed to ensure a good crop for the following year. Therefore, a two-year growth period decreases the influence of the
fruit production factor. The results obtained in the ANOVA
are shown in Fig. 6.

3.6.

Absence/presence of irrigation

The residual biomass obtained from the pruning of trees


cultivated in non-irrigated land (num. trees 968, num. plots

108) was compared with that produced by trees with trickle


irrigation (num. trees 1174, num. plots 130). The latter
produced a greater amount of biomass in the residues
generated by annual pruning, where significant differences
exist among the different levels, in the absence and presence
of this factor. Fig. 7 shows a graph of the LSD intervals. Unlike
annual pruning, biennial pruning did not record significant
differences in the amount of residual biomass produced. This
is caused by the longer period between pruning and the
similar vegetative development of the trees with and without
irrigation, which generated similar quantities of biomass. In
this case, there were no significant differences when biomass
was quantified per tree or per hectare.

Fig. 5 e LSD intervals for the "aim of pruning" factor in the amount of residual biomass in olive tree pruning at 95% level of
confidence.

Author's personal copy

Fig. 6 e LSD intervals for the "fruit production" factor in the amount of residual biomass from olive tree pruning at 95% level
of confidence.

Fig. 7 e LSD intervals for the "irrigation" factor in the amount of residual biomass in olive tree pruning at 95% level of
confidence.

Author's personal copy


3215

b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

Table 5 e Equations to predict the biomass obtained per tree from the pruning of olive trees.
Biennial pruning
BOTkg=tree 6:720 3:544,r 0:073,e 0:0283dc 2:608,h
BOTkg=tree 2:033 0:109,m  0:065,m,r 0:003,m,e 1:477,r,h 0:089,e,h
Annual pruning
BOTkg=tree 5:855 3:429,r 0:046,e  0:431,p 1:478,dc 0:024,hc 1:390,h
BOTkg=tree 1:036 0:2064,p2  0:535,p,dc 1:431,dc,h  0:769,h2

Linear model
Quadratic model
Linear model
Quadratic model

3.7.
Regression models for the prediction of the residual
biomass produced
Several regression models were developed to predict the dry
biomass obtained per olive tree in pruning operations (BOT )
from other variables that influence the available amount,
explicative or independent variables. A regression model was
also calculated that relates the residual biomass obtained per
hectare (BOH ) with these variables. Initial testing, for
simplicity, was by a linear model. Subsequently, to improve
the coefficient of determination (r2) non-linear relations
formed by the squares or products of the independent variables were analyzed. The results obtained are shown in Tables
5 and 6. The characteristic parameters of the regression
models calculated are indicated in Table 7. In the following
list, only the statistically significant variables in the present
analysis are named.
Qualitative variable:
- Non-irrigated land/Irrigation (r). Indicates presence or
absence of irrigation. To include this variable in the model, we
employed a dummy variable, which takes the value 0 when
the trees are cultivated in non-irrigated land and 1 when the
trees are cultivated with irrigation.
Quantitative variable:
- Height of tree (h). Indicates the height of the tree in meters.
- Age (e). Indicates the age of the tree in years.

- Diameter of the crown (dc). Indicates the average of the


diameters perpendicularly measured in m.
- Size of plantation (m). Represents the area occupied by each
tree in the plot in m2.
- Fruit production (p). The quantity of fruit in tons obtained
per hectare.
- Number of stems (n). Indicates the number of stems
emerging from the tree roots.
Since the p-value in the ANOVA tables is smaller than 0.01,
there is a statistically significant relationship among the variables of the models, with a 99% level of confidence. The r2 of the
linear models is situated around 0.65 in biannual and annual
pruning, whether the residual biomass is quantified in kg dry
matter tree1 or in t ha1. This indicates that the linear models
explain approximately 65% of the changeability in the quantity
of dry biomass obtained. Average absolute errors are 0.604 kg
tree1 and 0.101 t ha1 in annual pruning, and 2.091 kg tree1
and 0.370 t ha1 in biannual pruning. These values represent
the average error for the prediction obtained by using the linear
equations calculated, BOT and BOH, respectively. The standard
deviation indicates the prediction error dispersion. Introducing the quadratic components in the regression models can
be seen to substantially improve the coefficient of determination, which reaches 0.71 and 0.73 in annual pruning, and 0.66
and 0.73 in biennial pruning, and average absolute errors and
dispersion decrease, these being 0.083 kg tree1 in annual
pruning 0.183 t ha1 in biennial pruning.

Table 6 e Equations to predict the biomass obtained per hectare from the pruning of olive trees.
Biennial pruning
Linear model
Quadratic model
Linear model
Quadratic model

BOHt=ha 0:196  0:012,m 0:718,r 0; 017,e 0:007,dc 0:207,h


BOHt=ha 0:841 0:087,e  0:636,h  0:0011,m,e 0:0036,m,h 0:1178, r,h  0:0003,e,dc 0; 013,e,h 0:0032,dc,h
Annual pruning
BOHt=ha 0:438 0:526,r 0:011,e 0:1123,dc 0:0079,hc
BOHt=ha 0:184 0:0051,r,e 0:098,e 0:135,dc 0:093,hc

Table 7 e Characterization of models to predict the biomass obtained from the pruning of the olive trees.
Annual pruning
2

BOT
(kg tree1)
BOH
(t ha1)

Linear model
Quadratic model
Linear model
Quadratic model

Biennial pruning
2

Average
absolute error

Standard dev.
Error

p-value

68
71
65
73

0.604
0.307
0.101
0.083

0.561
0.292
0.090
0.070

<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01

61
66
63
73

Average
absolute error

Standard dev.
error

p-value

2.091
1.904
0.370
0.183

0.656
0.498
0.118
0.033

<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01

Author's personal copy


3216

4.

b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

Conclusions

In this work the residual biomass obtained from different


varieties of olive trees was quantified and the influence of the
different factors involved was analyzed. The regression equations for the prediction of the biomass produced, based on the
influence of these factors, were also obtained. These estimations will permit surveys to be carried out of the available
biomass in a given zone from the cadastral register divided into
plots and the agronomic characteristic of the different olive
groves. From these basic data, it will thus be possible to apply
logistic models such as the Borvemar model, developed by
Velazquez and Annevelink (2009) [7]. This model provides the
location of actual points in the area where biomass can be
concentrated with a minimum amount of available biomass
and a limited area. These biomass source points should be
interconnected with other points containing consumption
facilities (power plants). A network structure was built using
these concepts. Optimization of the selection of the supply
source points for power plants can be solved by linear
programming in the structured network from a digital map GIS,
so that the data analyzed in the present investigation are basic
for its implementation. Another possibility is the Bioloco
model (Biomass Logistics Computer Optimization) developed
by Annevelink and de Mol, (2007) [5], and Diekema, et al, (2005)
[6]. This algorithm analyzes a logistic network formed by origin
nodes (sources of biomass) and destination nodes (biomass
transformation plants), connected by arcs that represent prices or distances. This model calculates the optimum source
nodes and the destination node supply routes for any given
time of the year. The Bioloco model uses the Borvemar model to
construct the network. The Borvemar model needs basic data,
such as the production of the different types of orchards.
The results show that for the purpose of annual pruning,
olive tree varieties can be classified into two groups according
to the residual biomass generated:
a) High production of residual biomass (average yield 10.5 kg
dry biomass tree1) that includes varieties such as: Blanqueta, Mountain, Chamomile and Picual
b) Low production (average yield 3.5 kg dry biomass tree1):
Grosal, Frantoio, Villalonga and Conicabra
There are also varieties such as Arbequina and Royal, which
can be considered as transition varieties and show an intermediate production of pruning residues, although these differences
do not exist in biennial pruning, reaching an average residual
biomass 33 kg tree1. This means that in Mediterranean areas
the residual biomass from olive pruning reaches an average
1.31 t ha1 in annual and 3.02 t ha1 in biennial pruning.
From the statistical analysis it can be concluded that for
the amount of residual biomass generated per tree in pruning
operations there are no significant differences in trees older
than 10 years. Nevertheless, analysis of the production of
biomass per hectare shows that in annual pruning the
orchards over 40 years old produce the biggest amount of
residual biomass per hectare (2.1 t ha1), presenting significant differences with trees less than 40 years old, which
produce 1.4 t ha1 between 10 and 40 years and 0.8 t ha1 if the

trees are younger than 10 years old. This is due to the fact that
in the oldest olive groves the trees had a smaller growing
space and therefore produced more biomass per hectare,
although the residues generated per tree were smaller. On the
other hand, in biennial pruning, the biomass obtained per
hectare does not differ according to the age or irrigation. This
means that the production of residual biomass is similar for
all trees if they have enough time for development (two years).
For biennial pruning the space allocated to each tree is
significant in the amount of residual biomass obtained per tree,
the greatest quantities of biomass being obtained from trees
with the largest space for growth. Although groves with
smaller allocated growing space have a greater number of
plants per hectare, since the development of each tree is highly
influenced by the proximity to its neighbours, the biomass
obtained in this area does not increase significantly in olive
trees. Little separation among trees increases competition for
water, nutrients and light and therefore slow growth with low
production of residual biomass. On the other hand, wider
separation provides larger crown diameters and therefore
greater residual biomass per tree. In this respect the olive tree is
different to other species of fruit trees, in which a greater
number of plants per hectare leads to greater residual biomass,
although high fruit production also increases biomass in olive
trees, as does the presence of irrigation. Pruning for rejuvenation is the most productive for residual biomass, since all
except the primary branches are removed.

references

[1] McKendry P. Energy production from biomass (part 1).


Overview of Biomass Bioresource Technology 2002;
83(1):37e46.
[2] FAO. The role of wood energy in Europe and OECD, WETTWood energy Today for Tomorrow. Rome: FOPW, Forestry
Department; 1997.
[3] Velazquez-Mart B. Aprovechamiento de los residuos
forestales para uso energetico. Universidad Politecnica de
Valencia; 2006. 2006e2766.
[4] Askew MF, Holmes CA. The potential for biomass and energy
crops in agriculture in Europe, in land use, policy and rural
economy terms. International Sugar Journal 2002;104(1247):
482e591 (Reprinted from Aspects in Applied Biology 2001; 65:
365e74).
[5] Annevelink E, de Mol RM. Biomass logistics. 15th European
biomass Conference 2007. Berlin, Germany.
[6] Diekema WH, De Mol RM, Annevelink E, Elbersen HW.
Combining goals in the logistics bio-energy chains. 14th
European biomass Conference 2005; Paris, France: 495e498.
[7] Velazquez-Mart B, Annevelink E. GIS application to define
biomass collection points as sources for linear
programming of delivery networks. Transactions of ASABE
2009;52(4):225e36.
[8] Berruto R, Busato P. Biomass Supply Chain Assessment by
Means of Web Application: Technical, Economic and
Energetic Aspects. Ageng conference 2008; Crete (Greece).
Paper OP-255
[9] Fernandez-Gonzalez E. esAnalisis de los procesos de
produccion de biomasa residual procedente del cultivo de
frutales mediterraneos. Cuantificacion, cosecha y
caracterizacion para su uso energetico o industrial. Doctoral
Thesis. Polytechnic University of Valencia 2009.

Author's personal copy


b i o m a s s a n d b i o e n e r g y 3 5 ( 2 0 1 1 ) 3 2 0 8 e3 2 1 7

[10] Velazquez-Mart B, Fernandez-Gonzalez E. Analysis of the


process of biomass harvesting with collecting-chippers fed
by pick up headers in plantations of olive trees. Biosystems
Engineering 2009;52(4):225e36.
[11] FAO. WISDOM, wood Integrated Supply/Demand Overview
Mapping; 2003. 52 pp.
[12] Cantini C, Panicucci M. 2002. Managing of a traditional olive
orchard by timesaving biennial pruning. Acta Horticulturae:
IV International Symposium on Olive Growing. 586:
361e363.

3217

[13] Romero I, Moya M, Cara C, Ruiz E, Castro E. esLa poda del


olivar como fuente de energa renovable: obtencion de
biocombustibles. Jaen (Espana). Congreso de la Cultura del
Olivo; 2007. 587e602.
[14] Di Blasi C, Tanzi V, Lanzetta M. A study on the production of
agricultural residues in Italy. Biomass Bioenergy 1997;12(5):
321e33.
[15] Spnelli R, Magagnotti N, Picchi G. The Jordan RH 25
chipper at work on olive prunings. Informatore Agrario
SRL 2007;63:55e8.