Regenerative agronomy

[Chris F]

We will agree to disagree on this. In my opinion, there will be a carbon tax put on fuel and fertiliser in the future in the name of "saving the planet". Probably not for nitrate levels in water though we have many watercourses over the 50 mg/l limit under the EU Water Framework Directive.

Polluter pays is coming. So expect big taxes on synthetic fert.

 

[teslacoils]

Polluter pays is coming. So expect big taxes on synthetic fert.

They have to be very careful on this. Only takes a ten minute drive and I'll show you several heaps of "bio fert" aka sewage sludge piled too close to watercourses / over main drains / same place as last year. No doubt some third party would cop it, but I'd be less sure about N tax than other anti pollution nonsense that's in the pipeline.

 

[Hindsight]

We will agree to disagree on this. In my opinion, there will be a carbon tax put on fuel and fertiliser in the future in the name of "saving the planet". Probably not for nitrate levels in water though we have many watercourses over the 50 mg/l limit under the EU Water Framework Directive.

Do we? Genuine question - you seem good at researching these things. I thought there are groundwater sources at or abve the 50mg lt level, but very few surface waters except for short periods of time in some years in the early autumn when first autumn rains flush the system. But I stand to be corrected. Many thanks.

 

[Hindsight]

Polluter pays is coming. So expect big taxes on synthetic fert.

Production of Nitrogen fert is a major contributor to GHG. A possible 'sensibe' compromise solution for society as a whole is restricting N applications to around 95% of economic optimum, thus reasonable efficiency of nitrogen use and crop yield not sacrificed. i seem to recall this is along the lines of the existing Danish NVZ regs - though I could be making that up and would need verifying.

 

[SilliamWhale]

We will agree to disagree on this. In my opinion, there will be a carbon tax put on fuel and fertiliser in the future in the name of "saving the planet". Probably not for nitrate levels in water though we have many watercourses over the 50 mg/l limit under the EU Water Framework Directive.

We shall see! I'd be surprised to see a GHG tax on nitrogen

 

[Brisel]

Do we? Genuine question - you seem good at researching these things. I thought there are groundwater sources at or abve the 50mg lt level, but very few surface waters except for short periods of time in some years in the early autumn when first autumn rains flush the system. But I stand to be corrected. Many thanks.

I must admit I haven't checked how many are over the limit recently. I will do so tomorrow

 

[Hindsight]

I must admit I haven't checked how many are over the limit recently. I will do so tomorrow

Around page 21 has a few graphs and some data. Attached document is worth a read.

House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee
UK Progress on Reducing Nitrate Pollution
Eleventh Report of Session 2017–19

 

[puppet]

I'm based around Cambridgeshire / Norfolk border farming just under 1800 ha of combinable crops and sugar beet.

I am looking for a new agronomy package that looks way beyond pesticides and inorganic fertilisers. Although I am in no way against using pesticides and fertilisers the writing is surely on the wall that the continued current use will not carry on forever.
Waiting in anticipation!

Grass, grass, grass, barley, root crop, barley, grass...
Plough endrigs outwards for the barley and in for the roots. Yield 2 tons per acre.
That worked for a long time.

 

[Grass And Grain]

Polluter pays is coming. So expect big taxes on synthetic fert.

Production of Nitrogen fert is a major contributor to GHG.

...but grass or cereal crops that receive 180kg/ha N grow much more vigorously and capture a lot more carbon than crops that receive no N. And it uses less land for the same yield, so can then set-aside some for environmental options.

Maybe there should be a subsidy for using artificial fert.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

How DO they measure N use efficiency? I can't see how it can be done accurately in the field?

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

I think you boys are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. There will be no reduction of N usage for the sake of the climate in my view.

We will agree to disagree on this. In my opinion, there will be a carbon tax put on fuel and fertiliser in the future in the name of "saving the planet". Probably not for nitrate levels in water though we have many watercourses over the 50 mg/l limit under the EU Water Framework Directive.

Have you seen the reasonably robust research from the large Danish study which appears to show nitrate in drinking water above 1.5ppm greatly increases some cancer rates. Apparently 50ppm, our current surface water limit, is way too high!

There is clearly a nitrate/nitrite link to cancer rates. It's only the nitrite in preserved meats that had any cancer effect.

 

[Brisel]

No, I haven’t seen that study. Seriously, how achievable is reducing nitrates to that level? If we stopped applying all manufactured nitrogen today we wouldn’t drop levels in water for 50+ years.

Is nitrate more likely to cause cancer than glyphosate?

 

[Brisel]

How DO they measure N use efficiency? I can't see how it can be done accurately in the field?

You’d better ask @B'o'B

 

[teslacoils]

Have you seen the reasonably robust research from the large Danish study which appears to show nitrate in drinking water above 1.5ppm greatly increases some cancer rates. Apparently 50ppm, our current surface water limit, is way too high!

There is clearly a nitrate/nitrite link to cancer rates. It's only the nitrite in preserved meats that had any cancer effect.

5mg per litre in Perrier says the old Google. How's that fit with Danish research?

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

No, I haven’t seen that study. Seriously, how achievable is reducing nitrates to that level? If we stopped applying all manufactured nitrogen today we wouldn’t drop levels in water for 50+ years.

Is nitrate more likely to cause cancer than glyphosate?

This is the study:

Nitrate in drinking water and colorectal cancer risk: A nationwide population-based cohort study - PubMed

Nitrate in drinking water may increase risk of colorectal cancer due to endogenous transformation into carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds. Epidemiological studies are few and often challenged by their limited ability of estimating long-term exposure on a detailed individual level. We exploited...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Usually I have little faith in epidemiological studies but this is a reasonably structured one across millions of people using government health data.

It poses a serious question.

 

[B'o'B]

You’d better ask @B'o'B

@holwellcourtfarm
Basically someone else did the calculations and much of the technical work for me, so I'm not really the person to ask. But you need a nil N plot to compare against, grain yield and protein results and soil N tests taken at the start of the season. They also took quite a lot of quadrants of crop cut off at ground level several times through the season to weigh and analyse. So I do know it's wasn't a quick or cheap thing to do!

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

@holwellcourtfarm
Basically someone else did the calculations and much of the technical work for me, so I'm not really the person to ask. But you need a nil N plot to compare against, grain yield and protein results and soil N tests taken at the start of the season. They also took quite a lot of quadrants of crop cut off at ground level several times through the season to weigh and analyse. So I do know it's wasn't a quick or cheap thing to do!

Ok, fairly comprehensive then. I wonder how they allow for N fixed in the soil. They must be assuming that the rest is lost unless they somehow measure the N in the groundwater and runoff.

 

[Brisel]

You'd think they'd test for SMN or at least consider it, not that it's a particularly accurate measurement of what's available to or taken up by the crop.

 

[Warnesworth]

You could use Steve Townsend or James Warne for a couple of consultancy sessions?

But remember your the man who has to do the farming also its not that complicated really. Which areas in particular are you not so sure about? My opinion on most biologicals is a bit, meh...

Best thing you can do is take a week off and go and visit 10 farms doing what they do on here with regards to no till and you will learn heaps.

More than happy to help wherever we can. Details below.
cheers.

 

[Andy004]

Hi folks,
To calculate N use efficiency we use N available (SMN in Feb + N from fertiliser), N uptake (N in grain and N in straw) and grain yield.
Nuptake efficiency is kg taken up (at harvest, g+s) divided by N available. N utilisation efficiency is kg grain per kg N taken up, and NUE is NUpE x NUtE.
There are other ways, eg using yield with no applied N as the baseline.
SMN misses out N mineralised in season, some folk measure SMN again at harvest, but it’s difficult when the soil’s dry. We assume all soil N is used, which is probably wrong, but we’re mainly using NUE to compare between varieties, so SMN is a constant and doesn’t really affect the data. We’re also ignoring N deposition, but again,it’s a constant so fair enough to ignore.
Cheers
Andy