Although it costs me 5l/ha of fuel to establish a crop so that is related to carbon.His is an accurate summary of the evidence. And that evidence derives too from long-term trials. I have a paper from a 41 year no-till vs tillage comparison. No evidence there that ploughing is worse on this measure. There's lots of benefits of no-till, but this is not clearly one of them.
No, it isn't. It really isn't. You can make the argument that no-till systems (incorporating other things such as cover crops) can sequester carbon, but if just isolating the tillage or no-tillage element, the evidence really is very weak that no-till is better.
Although it costs me 5l/ha of fuel to establish a crop so that is related to carbon.
Although it costs me 5l/ha of fuel to establish a crop so that is related to carbon.
Yes, obviously establishment per hectare in energy costs are lower, but that wasn't the point of contention. That said, if yield does not hold up under no-till then energy costs per tonne could be different.
If you get soil erosion from intensive tillage which ends up in water courses etc are we to pretend that is not Carbon leaving the field?
Because of the monoculture element.No, it isn't. It really isn't. You can make the argument that no-till systems (incorporating other things such as cover crops) can sequester carbon, but if just isolating the tillage or no-tillage element, the evidence really is very weak that no-till is better.
I think there is much clearer evidence on the benefits of no-till from aggregate stability and soil loss due to run-off (although there are some issues with higher no-till P losses due to much higher P concentrations near the surface in no-till systems). You would need to show that that soil loss means greater atmospheric carbon which is what we're discussing. I did actually come across a paper by Lal on this earlier. Will try and find it again.
How VERY dare you!!!!! (What tv program was that from?)Ploughing should be illegal
What is the carbon footprint of the Glyphosate you use? (Don’t forget it is nearly all made in China!)Although it costs me 5l/ha of fuel to establish a crop so that is related to carbon.
You’re future proofing relies on everything the future legislation is going against!How VERY dare you!!!!! (What the program was that from?)
What is the carbon footprint of the Glyphosate you use? (Don’t forget it is nearly all made in China!)
And what are you going to do when it is made illegal to use?
My reason for having returned to ploughing is totally down to far more efficient Blackgrass control.
The fact that it still allows me to drill early and I did get it all drilled here by early October is a huge bonus this year.
But it might just turn out that by continuing to plough here, I am future-proofing this farm, insofar as I have proved that we can farm without Glyphosate.
Well, we don’t know.You’re future proofing relies on everything the future legislation is going against!
South bury on the hanslope. I agree with you, I don’t really care what others do, it’s fun to stir though!Well, we don’t know.
You maybe have got one angle of it covered and maybe I have the other angle.
However, wouldn’t it be a bugger if having made ploughing illegal (which I doubt that they could or would do), they then banned glyphosate?
That is why I warn of certain farmers shouting too load about their system, with no regard whatsoever that it won’t work everywhere.
Where a-bouts in Suffolk are you? I used to farm there myself.
why ? ruins the forum.South bury on the hanslope. I agree with you, I don’t really care what others do, it’s fun to stir though!
Stupid boyPloughing should be illegal
Averaging 17acres an hour for 4 days and nights is impressive. How many drills?No ploughing/cultivations here, 1700ac wheat drilled in 4 days in October, all good. 300ac of spring oats in and up, sheep eating the cover crops, 49mm rain in the last 7 days
Someone bitStupid boy
Averaging 17acres an hour for 4 days and nights is impressive. How many drills?
' Who do you think you are kidding Mr Hitler?'Someone bit