Cellulosic Feedstock Vs. Forage.

Except for different ideal quality parameters, cellulosic feedstock for bioenergy (CFB) and forage production systems are closely related. In fact, most proposed CFB production technology is a direct outgrowth of forage systems, including researcher academic preparation, targeted farmland unsuited for row cropping, plant species and agronomic techniques. No surprise, then, that there is potential competition between CFB and forages for future land use and product market. The initial philosophy among CFB proponents was that forage and pasture systems, whether cultivated, rangeland or natural grasslands, had to convert exclusively to bioenergy. For example, US Department of Energy Funding for research and development of dual-purpose CFB-forage systems was unavailable in the early years. Fortunately this initial short-sightedness has gradually eroded to be replaced with a more synergistic approach. This came about with the realization that converting forage systems to exclusive CFB production posed insurmountable cultural and market challenges, especially without transition strategies. Today policy makers, funding agencies, researchers and bioenergy entrepreneurs recognize that the transition from forage to CFB or dual systems must accommodate vacillations inherent in climate variability, beef markets and the petroleum industry. Dual systems that maintain culturally and economically important forages within dual CFB-forage, including technologically and economically feasible transitions with minimum competition with meat production, will have greater chances for success. These include flexible strategies that tap market opportunities, biomass production surges during high-rainfall years, less centralized CFB conversion plants, income diversification and ecosystems services.