Background Information

Roadways ≈ 4 million miles

– If 25% of area is used = 10 million acres

Railroads ≈ 140,000 miles of rights of way

– If 75% of area is used = 1 million acres

Airports ≈ 19,820

– If 100 acres/ airport = 2 million acres

Military ≈ Department of Defense owns 30

million acres of arable land in the United

States

– If 30% of areas are used 8 million acres

Project Objectives

Explore Roadside Agronomic Conditions

Initiate Environmental Impact Study

Investigate Economic Viability

Evaluate Crop Choices

Potential Benefits/Advantages

This method of fuel production:– Decreases costs of maintenance

– Aids in educating the public about renewable

fuels

– Increases biofuel production

– Improved aesthetics

– Does not affect food supply

“We need food and we need fuel, but those

shouldn’t conflict” Jeff Steiner USDA ARS

Considerations

Safety

Structural Integrity

Establishment and Harvesting

Economics

Wildlife Impacts

Ecology/Environmental Impacts

Water Quality

Grower Concerns

One Roadside Biofuel Production

Potential

UDOT Lands could potentially produce

over 250 gallons/mile of Biodiesel

– Assumptions:

100 Foot Wide Growing Region per Mile(12 acres)

60% Dry Land Yields

– This solves maintenance and pest cost

problems

$300/mile for 2007

Brief View of Economics' of F2F

insurance

interest

machine taxes

overhead

fallow cost

land rent

$0.00 $5.00 $10.00 $15.00 $20.00 $25.00 $30.00 $35.00

dollars/acre

co

st

dif

fere

nc

es

Major Economic Differences of UDOT Land vs Private Land Oilseed Production (FY 2006)

UDOT PRIVATE

F2F Research Plot Example

• 6 treatments

• 4 reps

• 4 locations

• 8’ X 20’ plots

• Crops tested• Canola

• Safflower

Roadside Soil Conditions

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

OM pH EC P K* x20 N Zn Fe Cu Mn S

PP

M

Analysis

Average

Control

Roadside Soil Compaction

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1 2 3 4 5 6

PS

I

Soil Depth in Inches

Compaction of Utah Roadside vs Traditional Farm Soils

Roadside Soil Compaction

Farm Soil Compaction

A Closer Look at Planting How did compaction affect planting?

≈Drill Opener and

Press Wheels

Resulting in open furrows

with no seed/soil contact

and evaporation

Yield Data 2007/2008

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Normal Farm Conditions*

Kaysville Roadside MM240 Roadside Tremonton Roadside

lbs/

acre

Spring Canola

Round up Ready Spring Canola

Spring Safflower

* this represents <25% of average yield for these crops

Hypothesis for Low Crop Yield

Extreme Climatic

Conditions

Extreme

Compaction

Planting

Techniques

Precipitation Data SLC UT

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

March April* May June** July

RSL Research Focus

Simulate roadside compaction and soil

quality

Evaluate plant establishment techniques

Current Research

RSL

Greenhouse

Land Feasibility

FreeWays to Fuel National Alliance

RSL Research Focus (cont.)

Seeding PassCompaction

Relief Culti-Planting≈

Control = No Till Drill

Safflower seeds

on top of the

ground

VS

Culti-Banding

Compaction relief with minimal

disturbance to soil

Initial Results

Greenhouse Study

Evaluation Topics:

– Depth of

Emergence

– Compaction

Effects

– Furrow Effects

– Coulter Effects

– Press Wheel

Effects

– Moisture Effects

Feasible Study

Estimated 10 Million Acres From:

– Roadsides

– Military installations

– Airports

– Brownfields

– Railroads

– Power companies

– Tribal Lands

– Landfills

FreeWays to Fuel Alliance Top Tier Universities

Washington State University, Iowa

State, Auburn, Michigan State University, Montana

State, North Carolina State University, University of

Idaho, State University at New York –

Cobbleskill, Penn State University

Corporate New Holland – tractor donation

Great Plains – drill equipment donation

Aerway Ag – aerator donation

Government State Departments of Transportation

DOD Interests

State Energy Departments