Controlled traffic/permanent bed farming reduces GHG emissions. Jeff Tullberg
Post on 14-Dec-2014
696 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Transcript
Controlled traffic/permanent bed farming reduces GHG emissions.
Jeff Tullberg , Jack McHugh, Boorzoo Ghareel Khabbaz, University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba and CTF Solutions, Brisbane.
Clemens Scheer, Peter GraceQueensland University of Technology, Brisbane.
Australian controlled traffic (no-till) farming
Harvesting, Seeding, Spraying,
From same permanent traffic lanes
China Controlled Traffic Research
Harvesting, Seeding, Spraying,
From same permanent traffic lanes
Controlled Traffic Farming (CTF)• Permanent traffic lanes for all heavy wheels.
Permanent no-till crop beds.• Layouts designed for drainage and logistics.
Timeliness, precision, better soil and agronomy**opportunity crops, optimised inputs
Many characteristic shared with – Permanent Raised Bed (PRB) in Mexico and Asia – Permanent bed, reduced-till intensive cropping.
Impact?
Parameter Units Australian Vertosol China, Loess
Wheeled Non-wheeled Wheeled Non-wheeled
Wheel Load t/axle 4-5 1-2
Rainfall ( 5year mean) mm/yr 907 (incl. irrigation) 558
Runoff ( 5year mean) mm/yr 193 112L 32 18W
Infiltration (80mm/h, 1h) mm/h 27 97L 12 41W
Available water
Top 300mm
mm 29 47M 27 30W
Bulk density 1.36 1.28M 1.51 1.59W
Earthworms/m2 # 40 108
Fuel use, seeding l/ha 5.6 3.0T / /
Grain yield( 5year mean) t/ha 3.70 4.05T 3.05 3.25W
L Li et (2007); W Wang et al(2009): T Tullberg et al(2007); M McHugh et al(2009)
TComparison of wheeled and non-wheeled soil
Why?
Annual Tractor Wheel Impact in Zero Till
.
24 cm
4- Years CTF Non-Wheeled
Annually Wheeled (5t Tractor)
Black = Soil Solids, White = Air or Water (from D.McGarry )
Greenhouse Impact?
• Inputs • Fuel, Machinery• Herbicides• Fertilisers
• Outputs • Nitrous oxide & methane• Nitrate in runoff and drainage• Nitrate in eroded soil
}
}
Easily QuantifiedFor Known Systems
Highly Variable, Less Well-Understood
Greenhouse gas emissions (not Carbon)
Energy
Wasted Energy
In practise:Greenhouse Impact = Economic Impact
Soil Emissions – Nitrous Oxide, NO3 (+ Methane)
Literature: N loss and emissions associated with waterlogging
NO3emissions occur when: Water- filled porosity <75%, >65%., Nitrate +C present in surface 10 cm.
Management Impact ?
Till v. no-till: less NO3 emissions in well-drained soils. (Rochette 2009) more NO3 emissions in poorly drained soils.
(measurements rarely taken in wheel tracks)
Wheel effect: wheeled soil emissions 5 x non wheeled (Russer 1998)(potato fields) wheeled soil emissions 5 x non wheeled (Thomas 2003)
Common thread– wheel effects?
Permanent Traffic Lane
(T.Lane)
Permanent Traffic Lane
(T.Lane)
Permanent Bed Non-Wheeled
(P.Bed)Permanent Bed +
1 Pre-seeding Wheeling (Rand)
Pilot trial, 2010 Wheat seeded + 80kg/ha N as anhydrous ammomia, interrow
4-year of 3m CTFheavy vertosol, disk
seeder, tine fertiliser. 3m
Emission Chambers
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 450
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400N2O-N
ug.m-2.h-1T Lane
Rand
P Bed
Series7
Wheel Impact:N2O increased significantly on 3 occasions after rainCH4 increased significantly on 1 occasion after rain
Days after planting
Emissions
kg CO2-e/ha
Source T Lane Rand P Bed
kg kg kg
N2O 324.6 369.5 58.2
CH4 0.33 0.41 -0.43
Total 324.6 369.5 58.2
Ratio 5.57 6.35 1.00
Wheeltrack emissions probably greater by a factor of 5.0 – 7.0
Cumulative Emissions Emissions (6 weeks post-seeding)
Conclusions
1. Pilot trial confirms the literature: wheel track emissions 5-7 times greater than bed emissions.
2. Permanent traffic lanes in CTF occupy 10– 20% area.but minimum of 50% area is wheeled in non—CTF.
3. This suggests that CTF should reduce soil emissions by >50% possibly more with precise, split N application. plus a substantial impact on input-related emissions.
4. Improved agronomy, soil health and precision also increase WUEindicating possibility of greater biomass and C input.
Needs investigation in different environments
top related