Flax Harvest Management for Value-Added Uses

1. Flax Harvest Management for Value-Added Uses Mark Stumborg, P.Eng. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Alvin Ulrich & Randy Cowan Biolin Research

2. Harvest System Challenges Changes to the Harvest System must improve producer economic potential: • Maintain or improve grain quality/quantity; • Maintain or improve straw fibre quality/quantity; • Work in a multitude of crop types; Alternative System Bonus Points • Reduce time of harvest; • Reduce the fuel requirement for harvest; • Reduce header inventory (existing combine system); • Reduce the cost of the combine;

3. Straw Differences: 25 Bushel Flax Crop Rotary harvester windrow with 30’ draper header • Goals: • Develop economic harvest and biomass collection systems to supply consistent and economic qualities and quantities of straw for the provision of cellulosic feedstocks for value-added processing. • Provide harvest data and materials for subsequent processing and evaluation. Rotary harvester windrow with 30’ draper header Conventional combine windrow with 20’ auger header Flax straw piles awaiting burning outside Moose Jaw

4. Producer Returns: Quality Starts @ Harvest • Low Value Uses: • Example: flax pulp for paper quality enhancement. • Producer Net Range: $5 to $10 per tonne. • Savings from disposal and chopping: ~$1 per tonne. • Medium Value Uses: • Examples: insulation products, plastic composites, and low end textiles. • Producer Net Range: $30 to $100 per tonne. • High Value Uses: • Examples: high-end plastic composites and textile applications. • Producer Net Range: $60 to $150 per tonne. Note: Potential producer returns depend on fibre length, cleanliness, strength, & quantity. Rotary harvested straw can only meet the requirements for low value uses.

5. Simonson Farms Demo & Plot Activity • Case IH 2388 with Field Data Computer and Honey Bee Draper header • Adapter & Shelbourne Reynolds Stripper Header • Comparison with Massey 550 & Conventional Auger Header • Materials provided to SWM.

6. Plots: Swift Current Average Grain Yield 2005 - 09 Draft: Do Not Cite!

7. Plots: Indian Head Average Grain Yield 2008 - 09 Draft: Do Not Cite!

8. Observations from Plot Activity • Seed size did not appear as a factor in seed loss. • Loss was affected by the relationship of forward speed to rotor speed, bull nose adjustment relative to crop canopy, and material dryness / brittleness. • Seed yield differences between a bat reel and a pickup reel were noted as well. Note: Statistical analysis is incomplete at this time. Split plot statistics and conclusions will be done following 2011 crop year.

9. Demonstration Experience for Flax Harvesting Draft: Do Not Cite!

10. Demonstration Yield Comparisons: 2005 to 2008 2005 - 2008 2005 - 2007

11. Cellulose Yield Comparisons: 2005 - 2008

12. Observations from Demonstration Activity For Flax Harvest Demonstration (Simonson Farms): • The stripper header did not lead to any significant grain yield loss or gain. • Stripper header technology increased straw yield per hectare. • Stripper header technology increased fibre yield per hectare.

13. Stripper Header Issues and Modifications Bull Nose Adjustment: • Difficult to adjust according to variable crop height or condition. • Excessive interference causes increased straw breakage & grain loss. • Desiccation appears to embrittle plant components, increasing losses. Addition of guage wheels for rotor height control. Addition of a height indicator for operator visibility

14. Equipment Concepts • In-Field Retting Acceleration • Macerator • Conditioner • In-Field Partial Decortication • Bale Density Improvement

15. Mascerated Straw Conventional Straw Mascerated Straw Stripped Straw Typical Flax Straw Round Bale Weights: 1350 lbs Mascerated Flax Straw Bale Weight: 2200 lbs A 63% Increase !

16. Clean Fibre Yield (Brandon, MB)

17. Clean Fibre Yield (Indian Head, SK)

18. Clean Fibre Yield (Swift Current, SK)

19. Overall Harvest System Observations • Shelbourne Reynolds stripper header allows early access to seed harvest without desiccation. • Harvested flax as early as August 14th in 2007. Green straw in wheel tracks rebounds completely. • Conventional draper header harvest occurred September 4th. • Straw during harvest was visibly green. • As rotary combine technology increases its penetration, high quality biomass access will increasingly rely on technologies like the stripper header to reduce straw damage and increase quality and quantity consistency. • Rotary combine damage increases with brittleness/dryness of the harvested material. • Maximum fibre length is important if higher value markets are the target.

20. Overall Harvest System Observations (cont) • Energy savings have not been verified with the stripper header. • Producers have reported observed fuel savings of >20%. • Producers have reported specific harvest rate increases of >20% with smoother combine operation and increased window of harvest opportunity.

21. Questions Remaining to be Answered • If the straw is left standing until the following spring: • Can the subsequent crop be established in between flax rows? • How does increased snow capture in the Dark Brown and Black Soil zones affect access timing for the new agronomic year? • How much capital investment is required to ensure flax straw harvest is done on time prior to agronomic operations? • If increased retting opportunity is afforded by spring straw collection: • Are the processing benefits and the fibre value benefits enough to cover the costs and risks of an alternative harvesting system and spring collection? • Equipment costs / benefits: • Header purchase and potential change in seed harvest efficacy. • Reduced combine wear and tear. • Improved seed quality. • Straw disposal cost assessment: chopping, collection / burning. • Custom equipment, such as a windrower/mascerator/baler combination.

22. Thank You! The Canadian Biomass Innovation Network (CBIN) Integrated Biorefineries NRC EC IC AAFC Biomass Conversion Biomass Supply NRC NRCan AAFC NRCan AAFC Crop Fibres Canada Wheatland Conservation Schweitzer-Mauduit

23. Header Operation on Flax at Simonson Farms