Splash plate ban

ColinV6

Member
They were talking about a splash plate ban 15-20 years ago.
Guess it’s not urgent.

Exactly, my motto is, if they keep threatening it, more and more will change to dribble bar, so it hardly seems worth creating a total ban anyways. The few small scale farmers still doing their own slurry with a plate will be irrelevant.
 

Al R

Member
Livestock Farmer
Location
West Wales
I can’t remember the figures but something like 80% of nitrates are evaporated when the slurry hits the splash plate and into the sky.
 
Pardon my ignorance given I have, and will never have slurry tanker but what reason's are they wanting to ban it in the first place? air drift?
Apparently trials show you get far better utilisation of the N in the slurry by placing it on/in the ground.
Having had the contractor use both a dribble bar and injector here, which they charge extra for, I would have to say I’m not convinced............and I would guess plenty of others feel likewise as if it was as good as the claims, legislation wouldn’t be needed to force such techniques use.
 

Scribus

Member
Location
Central Atlantic
Pardon my ignorance given I have, and will never have slurry tanker but what reason's are they wanting to ban it in the first place? air drift?

Ammonia, the smelly bit in slurry, is a greenhouse gas with a very short life in the atmosphere, and the stink can be rather antisocial, a bit like stubble burning.

Having been using a dribble bar for a month or two the splash plate seems somewhat prehistoric now. However, there are issues, chief of which is that the tanker will empty a lot quicker meaning you will need to go faster to maintain the same application rate. Faster means more HP or a pump that is happy running at 540 rpm, it also means quicker turnaround times. On the other hand the application is far more controlled and is not subject to the wind. The macerator will also absorb power and the job becomes more complex as you need to power the macerator and fold the booms in addition to operating the valve.Trailing shoe units have the added complication of adjustable boom height. It can get busy in the cab, especially on rough ground.

The big plus is that you are not covering all the grass with solids, meaning it can get the sunlight and so grow away quicker. The sward can also be grazed within a few weeks, three is the quickest so far, rather than a month or two. Nitrogen is also conserved, I think Profi did a comparison last year and while the splash plate lost 70 or 80% of the N the dribble bar and trailing shoe lost around 25% and 20% respectively (going by memory). It's one of those developments that once you've tried it you'd never go back.
 
Apparently trials show you get far better utilisation of the N in the slurry by placing it on/in the ground.
Having had the contractor use both a dribble bar and injector here, which they charge extra for, I would have to say I’m not convinced............and I would guess plenty of others feel likewise as if it was as good as the claims, legislation wouldn’t be needed to force such techniques use.
ive seen a big difference here between injector and splash plate
 

Will you help clear snow?

  • yes

    Votes: 72 32.1%
  • no

    Votes: 152 67.9%

The London Palladium event “BPR Seminar”

  • 15,919
  • 244
This is our next step following the London rally 🚜

BPR is not just a farming issue, it affects ALL business, it removes incentive to invest for growth

Join us @LondonPalladium on the 16th for beginning of UK business fight back👍

Back
Top