'Cinderella gas' production under no-till

[Feldspar]

Oh go on. Might be an entertaining battle.

Unfortunately I have better things to do. In fact, I'm just going out skiing. Blue skies, the Americans have got over Thanksgiving, freshly sharpened skis. Not a soggy wheat field in sight to dampen the spirits. So long.

 

[Dan Powell]

Unfortunately I have better things to do. In fact, I'm just going out skiing. Blue skies, the Americans have got over Thanksgiving, freshly sharpened skis. Not a soggy wheat field in sight to dampen the spirits. So long.

Make sure you sequester the carbon you burn on the flight home once you get back on the farm... perhaps plant a tree or two.

 

[Feldspar]

Make sure you sequester the carbon you burn on the flight home once you get back on the farm... perhaps plant a tree or two.

I'll just turn the rate down on the fert spreader when I get back.

 

[SilliamWhale]

I think this is pretty sensible. So what I have to be aware of, if switching to no-till, is, if I am often seeing water logging in the top layer (saw this in the 750a trial this autumn), I would need to re-evaluate what I'm doing - because irrespective of N20 my crops won't like being wet anyway.

I agree that a lot of the maize ground around here looks absolutely terrible. That said our land which was ploughed in good time, is mole drained and tile drained has often been drier in the top 10cms than the no-till field. Fields which are 8 yrs into Claydon drilling still can get very soggy on top but that's not no-till so I don't judge based on that.

Well may I be so bold to suggest that maybe your soils need some priming before going no till. You may not like the sound of this but how about growing a C rich cover crop in a mix (kind of like the Soil Biology primers the N Dakotans like) and perhaps growing it and chopping it over the course of 12-18 months in order to get your natural drainage going a bit. I would suspect you should have less waterlogging and more natural drainage.

Also don't kid yourself that in a tillage system the soils are not capable of developing wet spots etc. you are basically lifting them up for about 2 months before they go back to a probably worse state of infiltration.

I see a dichotomy that maybe you are reluctant to address in that you've flown over to go skiing in USA but are worried about nitrous oxide emissions at home! Are you interested in the GHG from an ethical point of view or a commercial one? Have fun!

 

[Pedders]

I'm not spamming ....just wondering why you were so concerned about N2O ?

 

[martian]

Well it is laughing gas. As a miserable sod, I for one am dead against it.

 

[Pedders]

• Unfortunately I have better things to do. In fact, I'm just going out skiing.

well according to a report by the UN in 2003 that really shouldn't be possible

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=9035&Cr=climate&Cr1=change#.UpjRqnBSg9U

that'll be the same UN that's claiming in your opening post that N20 is destroying the Ozone layer won't it ?

 

[Feldspar]

well according to a report by the UN in 2003 that really shouldn't be possible

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=9035&Cr=climate&Cr1=change#.UpjRqnBSg9U

that'll be the same UN that's claiming in your opening post that N20 is destroying the Ozone layer won't it ?

Yes, it is, and they're right on both counts. There's hardly any snow here, hasn't snowed for ages and isn't forecast to in the near future so my skis are getting progressively ruined. And this resort supposedly is meant to get as much snow as anywhere in the world, so definitely sub-optimal. #firstworldproblems

 

[Feldspar]

Well may I be so bold to suggest that maybe your soils need some priming before going no till. You may not like the sound of this but how about growing a C rich cover crop in a mix (kind of like the Soil Biology primers the N Dakotans like) and perhaps growing it and chopping it over the course of 12-18 months in order to get your natural drainage going a bit. I would suspect you should have less waterlogging and more natural drainage.

Also don't kid yourself that in a tillage system the soils are not capable of developing wet spots etc. you are basically lifting them up for about 2 months before they go back to a probably worse state of infiltration.

I see a dichotomy that maybe you are reluctant to address in that you've flown over to go skiing in USA but are worried about nitrous oxide emissions at home! Are you interested in the GHG from an ethical point of view or a commercial one? Have fun!

Our pollen and nectar mixes have been in for over two years now and I can see that they have changed the nature of the top few inches of the soil. That said, the conditions were no more hospitable in these fields than some of the stubbles which were ploughed last year from the point of view of getting the 750a to work - I did try. Same thing with the 2yr extended overwinter stubbles which had heaps of worms casts plenty of old rooting channels from the various weeds that had been growing there. Anyway, regardless of whether that's the best way forward, as I suspect you would find in your situation, this suggestion would probably cause a paternal explosion.

On the second point, of course the ploughed stuff will self compact and compact due to rain fall etc. but in my experience it does not return to a worse state of infiltration, at least not in the top few inches in my experience on my soils. There generally seems to be more tilth around after ploughing than in the 1 and 2 year strip tilled land (happy to concede that no-till would be different, although in the short term, after my trials in the pollen and nectar mixes, I remain to be convinced). Ploughing creates an artificially and unnaturally heightened amount of aeration which persists well over a year (remember this is self structuring chalky boulder clay and other soil types may well be different) in the top few inches. The term 'tilth' is a word which fits into the vocabulary of the conventional establishment system and I certainly do not claim that it is a pre-requisite for successful crop establishment

Addressing the last point I don't see it as a dichotomy, I see it as direct hypocrisy on my part. I am a hypocrite who aim to become a little bit less hypocritical, rather than aiming to become a saint, which is unnecessary and unrealistic. Also, if I can make money and have fun along that route (as opposed to making money from plunder or whatever) then that's good too.

 

[tafka]

Also, whilst I'm doing a critical review, I remember a post on BFF written by Tom H questioning whether no-till really did increase the amount of soil organic carbon (SOC) in the soil. This paper addresses that question:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167880906001617

The fact that no-till increases SOC in the top 10cms or so of the soil seems fairly uncontroversial. However, if one is worried (as are policy makers who might give payments to conservation agriculture) about the amount of C sequestered as a result of no-till, it seems like the evidence isn't there in support. Nevertheless, the redistribution of SOC (rather than the change in total SOC) is itself arguably beneficial because it concentrates it more in the rooting zone where nutrient scavenging predominantly occurs.

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1591&context=agronomyfacpub

 

[Pedders]

Yes, it is, and they're right on both counts. There's hardly any snow here, hasn't snowed for ages and isn't forecast to in the near future so my skis are getting progressively ruined. And this resort supposedly is meant to get as much snow as anywhere in the world, so definitely sub-optimal. #firstworldproblems

It is Still only November so hardly surprising although they are already skiing in Scotland and its also dumping in the alps ready for one of the earliest starts to the season there too .....hardly overwhelming evidence for a rapidly warming world which is what all this is about isn't it ? Or has that been forgotten in pursuit of esoteric discussions about what trace gas does what to allegedly cause barely discernible changes in the atmosphere ?
Surely the overwhelming aim has to be farm for profit not greenhouse gases ?

 

[SilliamWhale]

Our pollen and nectar mixes have been in for over two years now and I can see that they have changed the nature of the top few inches of the soil. That said, the conditions were no more hospitable in these fields than some of the stubbles which were ploughed last year from the point of view of getting the 750a to work - I did try. Same thing with the 2yr extended overwinter stubbles which had heaps of worms casts plenty of old rooting channels from the various weeds that had been growing there. Anyway, regardless of whether that's the best way forward, as I suspect you would find in your situation, this suggestion would probably cause a paternal explosion.

On the second point, of course the ploughed stuff will self compact and compact due to rain fall etc. but in my experience it does not return to a worse state of infiltration, at least not in the top few inches in my experience on my soils. There generally seems to be more tilth around after ploughing than in the 1 and 2 year strip tilled land (happy to concede that no-till would be different, although in the short term, after my trials in the pollen and nectar mixes, I remain to be convinced). Ploughing creates an artificially and unnaturally heightened amount of aeration which persists well over a year (remember this is self structuring chalky boulder clay and other soil types may well be different) in the top few inches. The term 'tilth' is a word which fits into the vocabulary of the conventional establishment system and I certainly do not claim that it is a pre-requisite for successful crop establishment

Addressing the last point I don't see it as a dichotomy, I see it as direct hypocrisy on my part. I am a hypocrite who aim to become a little bit less hypocritical, rather than aiming to become a saint, which is unnecessary and unrealistic. Also, if I can make money and have fun along that route (as opposed to making money from plunder or whatever) then that's good too.

Our pollen and nectar mixes have been in for over two years now and I can see that they have changed the nature of the top few inches of the soil. That said, the conditions were no more hospitable in these fields than some of the stubbles which were ploughed last year from the point of view of getting the 750a to work - I did try. Same thing with the 2yr extended overwinter stubbles which had heaps of worms casts plenty of old rooting channels from the various weeds that had been growing there. Anyway, regardless of whether that's the best way forward, as I suspect you would find in your situation, this suggestion would probably cause a paternal explosion.

On the second point, of course the ploughed stuff will self compact and compact due to rain fall etc. but in my experience it does not return to a worse state of infiltration, at least not in the top few inches in my experience on my soils. There generally seems to be more tilth around after ploughing than in the 1 and 2 year strip tilled land (happy to concede that no-till would be different, although in the short term, after my trials in the pollen and nectar mixes, I remain to be convinced). Ploughing creates an artificially and unnaturally heightened amount of aeration which persists well over a year (remember this is self structuring chalky boulder clay and other soil types may well be different) in the top few inches. The term 'tilth' is a word which fits into the vocabulary of the conventional establishment system and I certainly do not claim that it is a pre-requisite for successful crop establishment

Addressing the last point I don't see it as a dichotomy, I see it as direct hypocrisy on my part. I am a hypocrite who aim to become a little bit less hypocritical, rather than aiming to become a saint, which is unnecessary and unrealistic. Also, if I can make money and have fun along that route (as opposed to making money from plunder or whatever) then that's good too.

It depends what you want to do and how you want to do it really. There will always be times when you feel ploughed looks better than no till and vice versa. They both have advantages and disadvantages from the point of view of crop production but the main aim of the no till is to build a better soil environment, reduce some costs and erosion and save time. If you are continually looking for differences between ploughed and no till you will find them, and you will find areas where you will rue the decision you made no matter what system you use.

So my own opinion is that I decide to no till because that is what I like doing, its where the interest is and therefore you make it work. It really is that simple. You will make some mistakes with equipment choice, crops etc. some time but its not worth dwelling on them too much because you will make other, different mistakes in other systems anyway. I don't think a classical composers gets hacked off when a heavy metal banned produce a great album do they? Different strokes for different folks. Always will be.

So for me it is a mindset, I'm not interested as much if my neighbours ploughed crop looks better than mine, as long as I know my crops and farm are as good as they can be by my standards and my costs are low enough a why worry about it? You will get occassions where you think had you ploughed it would have been better and you will get occassions where you think, what the hell was the point of ploughing that? Just decide the direction and make it work, and if you want to make it work enough it will work for you.

 

[Feldspar]

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1591&context=agronomyfacpub

Interesting, and pretty much the opposite conclusion (especially with regard to the deeper changes) to the study I linked to even though they have sampled to a great depth, which was the criticism of a number of studies. As well as sampling depth considerations there is also this mass effect which it looks like a number of studies haven't accounted for. If the bulk density of the soil profile changes under no-till versus conventional tillage then sampling the top x cms and then comparing without adjusting for different densities isn't going to work. Equally if conservation tillage actually 'grows' soil then this will not have been accounted for in some cases. See here:

http://pubs.aic.ca/doi/abs/10.4141/cjss95-075

This one seems to have received quite a lot of attention and looks into the benefit of rotational changes as well. I was interested to read their figures for how long it takes for a new equilibrium to form after switching to no-till (15-20yrs) and how long rotational changes take to reach equilibrium (40-60yrs!).

https://dl.sciencesocieties.org/publications/sssaj/abstracts/66/6/1930

 

[Feldspar]

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1591&context=agronomyfacpub

Actually this is probably the best response to the above paper:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167880913003502

NB the point about only half of the 100+ studies showing increased C sequestration under no-till. They also make Andy's point about the dependence on many different factors such as soil type, rotation etc. I think the take away point for me is that no-till does not always produce the benefits that people claim but, arguably, the better practitioners can make it work. Certainly the ideas and practices of Frederick Thomas are very inspiring and I look forward to watching his talk online.

 

[Feldspar]

It depends what you want to do and how you want to do it really. There will always be times when you feel ploughed looks better than no till and vice versa. They both have advantages and disadvantages from the point of view of crop production but the main aim of the no till is to build a better soil environment, reduce some costs and erosion and save time. If you are continually looking for differences between ploughed and no till you will find them, and you will find areas where you will rue the decision you made no matter what system you use.

So my own opinion is that I decide to no till because that is what I like doing, its where the interest is and therefore you make it work. It really is that simple. You will make some mistakes with equipment choice, crops etc. some time but its not worth dwelling on them too much because you will make other, different mistakes in other systems anyway. I don't think a classical composers gets hacked off when a heavy metal banned produce a great album do they? Different strokes for different folks. Always will be.

So for me it is a mindset, I'm not interested as much if my neighbours ploughed crop looks better than mine, as long as I know my crops and farm are as good as they can be by my standards and my costs are low enough a why worry about it? You will get occassions where you think had you ploughed it would have been better and you will get occassions where you think, what the hell was the point of ploughing that? Just decide the direction and make it work, and if you want to make it work enough it will work for you.

And this is the problem for me. I can't justify no-till simply because it's 'what I like doing' because the reply will simply come back, 'well I like ploughing', and nothing will happen. Equally, if I say I want to spend money on some product because I have a gut feeling about it then that won't work either. If you are inexperienced and you're running against the perceived wisdom you need to take the approach that I take otherwise any argument is too easily dismissed.

How would you characterise the relationship with you father? Have you managed to persuade him that no-till is much better than cultivating? From what you've mentioned about his lust for cultivating some field last year about 5 times I guess not completely!

I think one question that I need to seriously sit down and look at is the cost of failing to get crops planted in the autumn which, in my opinion, happens more frequently under no-till, especially on heavier soils. That is the main complaint against it that I hear in our area. When you have people farming 1500 acres under no-till who failed last year to drill anything in the autumn compared to most conventional neighbours who planted the majority of their planed autumn crops you do have to give an answer. You would have to argue that either a) you can get crops drilled as reliably with no-till, which would IMO require wider drills giving greater capacity in the earlier days (the new Sumo drill sounds like it'll be based on the DTS frame and so could potentially be available in 10-12m widths) or b) that failing to plant autumn crops is not that costly. Homework for another day.

 

[SilliamWhale]

And this is the problem for me. I can't justify no-till simply because it's 'what I like doing' because the reply will simply come back, 'well I like ploughing', and nothing will happen. Equally, if I say I want to spend money on some product because I have a gut feeling about it then that won't work either. If you are inexperienced and you're running against the perceived wisdom you need to take the approach that I take otherwise any argument is too easily dismissed.

How would you characterise the relationship with you father? Have you managed to persuade him that no-till is much better than cultivating? From what you've mentioned about his lust for cultivating some field last year about 5 times I guess not completely!

I think one question that I need to seriously sit down and look at is the cost of failing to get crops planted in the autumn which, in my opinion, happens more frequently under no-till, especially on heavier soils. That is the main complaint against it that I hear in our area. When you have people farming 1500 acres under no-till who failed last year to drill anything in the autumn compared to most conventional neighbours who planted the majority of their planed autumn crops you do have to give an answer. You would have to argue that either a) you can get crops drilled as reliably with no-till, which would IMO require wider drills giving greater capacity in the earlier days (the new Sumo drill sounds like it'll be based on the DTS frame and so could potentially be available in 10-12m widths) or b) that failing to plant autumn crops is not that costly. Homework for another day.

You can establish crops conventionally with a direct drill. I've done it loads of times with the john deere and it really is not a problem. So maybe there is room for compromise with your dad there ie just because you have a direct drill doesn't mean you have to no till. I don't understand why every farmer doesn't have a direct drill, there is no good reason not to.

Personally I felt there was a lot of potential in DD and I was sick of seeing our 100hp tractor wheelslip its way through wet ploughing for the first 5 years of my farming career. Coupled with job in OZ where they direct drilled anyway and as a backpacker seeing a load of soil erosion in all sorts of places around the world I then did a Nuffield Scholarship on no till and cover crops. I went to meet a lot of the leaders of this stuff in USA/ S America and this gave me more confidence than I had to see it through. As well as this forum of course.

Relationship with my dad is pretty good. He's getting on a bit now so I think both of us have realised that he won't be around for ever and also that when your young you have your best ideas so you need the chance to try them out, what is the gain in not? He has never really got no till but that's because maybe he feels its going against what he's known as "correct" - I did offer him the chance to go back to tillage last year but I know deep down he doesn't want to because he has seen what can be done with no till (good yields, good soils, timely establishment, less tractor hours). We had one field which we ploughed last year he cultivated it about 6 times in the summer and then asked me to go spray it because he couldn't kill the weeds - fallow doesn't really work, never did but he wanted to drive a tractor that day so what can you do?

I still think you need to get drilled up by end of Sept on heavy land personally. If its dry enough to combine, dry enough to plough and cultivate its dry enough to no till. Be ready to pounce when the time is right and get those crops in and growing as I think its a bit slower in the autumn.

This 1500 acre figure you come up with. Is that just winter cereals? If not I'd have thought if say 400 acs of that was rape and 400 acres was spring crops then getting in 700 acres of winter cereals is doable with a 6m drill? don't blame no till blame the management, its always to blame - the system is perfectly viable.

 

[Pedders]

And this is the problem for me. I can't justify no-till simply because it's 'what I like doing' because the reply will simply come back, 'well I like ploughing', and nothing will happen. Equally, if I say I want to spend money on some product because I have a gut feeling about it then that won't work either. If you are inexperienced and you're running against the perceived wisdom you need to take the approach that I take otherwise any argument is too easily dismissed.

Perhaps you need to ask yourself exactly why you want to no till ?

 

[Feldspar]

Perhaps you need to ask yourself exactly why you want to no till ?

I'm pretty clear of the main reason that I want to switch to no-till and that is because, in my view, it is the only option which will be viable in the not too distant future, arguably even if you ignore the question of longer term sustainability. The critical questioning in this thread is not really to do with why I would want to no-till, it's more about tightening up the understanding of exactly how good it is.

On the point about farming for profit or farming for greenhouse gases, I think there's a serious answer to this. If you operate a business with the right higher purpose (I'm not saying greenhouse gases, but maybe something around the idea of producing more from less, rather than producing more from more), then long-term profitability (and, perhaps more specifically, the long-term ability to be profitable) is a natural bi-product (Elon Musk being a role model in this respect:

).

Not only that, I think that the probability for greater than average returns goes up. If you do the same as your average joe, you're never going to do anything that exciting IMO, or be extraordinarily profitably (almost by definition). The killer question is what is the right higher purpose.

Oh, and by the way, it snowed 30cms yesterday AND it's colder today than yesterday. This means that global warming definitely isn't happening. I even met a man on the lift with no particular expertise who said the same thing, so I am now convinced.

 

[martian]

Feldspar, I met a 'top' economist once (well twice if you want to nit-pick, but that's not important right now) who, when she heard I was a farmer, said 'well, you're never going to get rich. There's too much competition.' And you know what? She was right

 

[Feldspar]

Feldspar, I met a 'top' economist once (well twice if you want to nit-pick, but that's not important right now) who, when she heard I was a farmer, said 'well, you're never going to get rich. There's too much competition.' And you know what? She was right

That depends upon what crops you grow. There are some pretty profitable unconventional crops around.