iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

No-Till Farming Reduces Greenhouse Gas, May Combat Climate Change: Purdue University Study

RICK CALLAHAN   01/ 5/11 08:55 AM ET   AP

No Till

INDIANAPOLIS — Cropland that's left unplowed between harvests releases significantly smaller amounts of a potent greenhouse gas than conventionally plowed fields, according to a new study that suggests no-till farming can combat global warming.

Researchers said the findings could also help farmers make more efficient use of the costly nitrogen-based fertilizers used to promote plant growth. No-till farming apparently slows the breakdown of fertilizers in the soil, they said.

The three-year, federally funded Purdue University study looked at the amount of nitrous oxide released by no-till fields compared to plowed fields. No-till farmers don't plow under their fields between crops and disrupt the soil surface as little as possible, although they do cut into it to plant seeds and inject fertilizers.

The study found no-till fields released 57 percent less nitrous oxide than chisel tilling, in which plants are plowed back into the soil after harvest, said Purdue agronomist Tony Vyn, who led the research. They also produced 40 percent less gas than fields tilled with moldboard plows, which turn the dirt over onto itself.

Those numbers are averages, he said. Researchers looked at fields where corn and soybeans were alternated from year to year and others that were planted each year from corn. Emissions in fields where crops were rotated were lower than in those where they weren't, he said.

Vyn said he was stunned by the large amounts of nitrous oxide his team detected in the air above the plowed fields compared with those that had long been farmed using the erosion-fighting no-till approach.

The results are particularly disconcerting in light of the fact that nitrous oxide packs 310 times the heat-trapping power of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas largely blamed for climate change, he said.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has determined that nitrous oxide can remain in the atmosphere for 120 years, adding to its global warming impact.

"Because it's so long lived, we need to do everything we can in terms of farming practices to reduce these releases," Vyn said. "Once it's released, it's going to be in the air for a long time – longer than anyone's lifetime."

His team's research results appear in the January-February issue of the Soil Science Society of America Journal.

Robert Horton, a professor of agronomy at Iowa State University who was not involved in the study, called the results exciting and said they highlight another potential benefit of no-till farming, which has already been shown to reduce erosion and improve soil quality.

"Now we can add an air quality advantage of no-till rotations to the list," he said.

Vyn's team conducted its research in fields Purdue maintains near the West Lafayette campus in rich soils that once were tall grass prairie. The university has farmed those fields for three decades using either no-till or one of the common plowing practices. The differences seen in the nitrous oxide emissions are likely due to variations in microbial life and soil chemistry created by the different farming practices, Vyn said.

Rodney Venterea, a soil scientist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's research arm, said the Purdue study supports his research, which also found that scaling back on field plowing reduces nitrous oxide emissions.

But he said the release of the gas is complex and not simply a matter of one farming practice versus another. For example, he's found no-till fields release more nitrous oxide than plowed land when fertilizer is applied to the soil surface rather than injected into the dirt. The Purdue researchers injected the liquid nitrogen fertilizer a few inches into the soil.

Venterea said it's important to note those different outcomes because some no-till farmers still use the surface-application approach, instead of injecting fertilizer below the surface, where plant matter accumulates and bacteria and fungi are active and can break down chemicals.

"So if you can get your nitrogen fertilizer down below that active zone then that's the best scenario," he said. "The more nitrogen fertilizer that stays in the soil, the more that's available for the plants and there's less that can be released as (nitrous oxide) and other forms that have other environmental effects."

Sixty-eight percent of the nitrous oxide emissions in the U.S. in 2008 came from farmland, according to an EPA report leased last year. It said U.S. emissions of the gas grew about 6 percent between 1990 and 2008.

Although the study looked at conventional farming techniques and industrial fertilizers, Vyn said manure used as fertilizer by some farmers, including organic farmers, can also release nitrous oxide if it is applied in large amounts.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

INDIANAPOLIS — Cropland that's left unplowed between harvests releases significantly smaller amounts of a potent greenhouse gas than conventionally plowed fields, according to a new study that s...
INDIANAPOLIS — Cropland that's left unplowed between harvests releases significantly smaller amounts of a potent greenhouse gas than conventionally plowed fields, according to a new study that s...
Filed by Zoe Triska  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 35
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
04:41 AM on 02/23/2011
Hello. Yesterday, doing my research about pesticides and herbicides I found one great website, with Open Access materials in this field. They are some books about Herbicides - Theory and Application, Pesticides and Fungicides. This is link which will connect you with these 6 books http://www.intechopen.com/subject/biological-sciences/agriculture/ . They are free to download. Some important aspects regarding the multisided impacts of herbicides on the living world are highlighted in this books. I am sure that the readers will find a lot of helpful information, even if they are only slightly interested in the topic. I found this very useful ! Cheers!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:07 PM on 01/06/2011
Wow Huff!
I wasn't expecting this! An article that shows conventional farming practices to potentially BENEFIT greenhouse emissions? Are you even aware of the ramifications in this? To plainly lay out a more fair & open discussion on the majority of farming practices in this country? I think I'm gonna faint.

As someone who leans more toward the organic end of things, I think the key phrase that stands out to me here is:
'no-till fields release more nitrous oxide than plowed land when fertilizer is applied to the soil surface rather than injected into the dirt'.

But do any non farmers (less than 2% of our population) reading this article know what the above quote actually means?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Anne Mccormick
12:24 PM on 01/08/2011
well, actually, this non farmer does understand. simply put, No-till farming (sometimes called zero tillage) is a method of growing crops from year to year without disturbing the soil through tillage. No-till is an agricultural technique coming into existence which can increase the amount of water in the soil and decrease erosion. It can also increase the amount and variety of life in and on the soil but, unfortunately, it can also mean an increase in herbicide usage. then there is the rather large expense the farmer has to put out in order to change over to the equipment necessary to convert to no-tillage.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:26 PM on 01/08/2011
I hope you post on Ag related Huff articles more often.

There is also an issue with the exact method of fertilizer injection. Some of the implements I've seen (and used) in my area would not qualify as 'no-till' in by opinion.
10:07 PM on 01/06/2011
One of the more interesting projects to address the problem is the fascinating, award winning work of Wes Jackson and the Land Institute, which is working to perennialize major crops such as wheat:
http://www.landinstitute.org/

The 50 year farm bill by Wes Jackson and Wendell Berry is a very intriguing idea:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/05/opinion/05berry.html
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
10:39 PM on 01/05/2011
GF, Here's your comment that apparently was removed:

grumpyfarmer Commented 3 hours ago
"Farmers haven't been tilling just for the hell of it, or to
thumb their noses at people who know everything there is to
know about farming, yet still don't farm themselves(might you
be in that category??). Tillage has been necessary for some
years because the tools and technology to make no till work
weren't there. No till is a work in progress. I can't
understand why there always has to be an element on Huff post
that insist everything farmers have ever done has been because
of some plot to kill the planet. Why would any of us want to
do that?
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:15 PM on 01/06/2011
thanks hazel for the repost,
I've seen too many ag poster's comments 'selected' for approval.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
07:40 PM on 01/05/2011
No and low till faming is better, cheaper and environmentally Superior. Rotating crops takes care of nearly all the weed and pest problems, as well as the nitrogen fixing requirements.
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
08:57 AM on 01/06/2011
"No and low till faming is better, cheaper and environmen­tally Superior."

Buying pesticides, herbicides, and GMO seeds produced in distant factories is hardly cheaper than conventional methods.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
07:10 PM on 01/06/2011
I was not suggesting they use pesticides, herbicides nor GMO seeds, in fact I would suggest organic farming and integrated pest management....
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
05:14 PM on 01/05/2011
The thing that needs to be discussed is that no-till leaves weeds and habitats for pests. A too common solution is to use herbicides and pesticides which are damaging to the local environment and require significant resources to transport from half a world away.
07:06 PM on 01/05/2011
That does need to be discussed.
photo
HazelPethigFan
I don't know until I know
10:29 PM on 01/05/2011
GF, what needs to be discussed? I am not going back to moldboard plows and cultivators. I'll give up the farm before i grease up that stuff again. I will never again use steel to get rid of weeds

Doc Skull and other urban food zealots can buy my farm and get busy with their labor intensive, high erosion, expensive farming methods they dream of.
09:27 PM on 01/05/2011
Nonsense. Total nonsense. Are you pro-soil erosion or something? Your pro-plowing, old fashioned farming methods are worse for the environment than no-Till methods.

....oh wait..it turns out it takes GMO seeds to do No-Till most of the time. That's something the article doesn't tell the reader.

AntiGMO is your real agenda isn't it Doc? Organic is very hard to do using no-till methods with plants that aren't RoundUp ready. You just can't stand it that modern agriculture is better for the environment than the obsolete tillage methods from the 1930's that resulted in the dust bowl.
photo
DocSkull
My questions aren't rhetorical.
11:35 PM on 01/05/2011
If tillage practices hadn't improved since the 1930s, there would have been continued problems. You avoid comparisons with current practices because they are no where near as bad as you pretend. and dousing fields with expensive imported chemicals is no where near as good.
04:07 PM on 01/06/2011
You nailed it svensven
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:40 PM on 01/05/2011
everyone who wanted to know, already knew this. it's people who make money killing the planet that insist on destroying the soil by tilling and who pretend it's a sustainable farming practice (uh, hello, dust bowl?). there is an excellent article in Countryside and Small Stock Journal last month explaining in enormous detail about how we need to spare the soil from these kinds of disruptions and how cover crops hugely benefit soil quality and yield without poisonous fertilizers and pesticides (and erosion and oxidization and GHG emissions)...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rich Phitzwell
04:38 PM on 01/05/2011
It should also be noted that no till originated from the dustbowl to combat well the dustbowl.
With that said, I can give two examples of two dairymen. Anybody that knows dairy or farming knows some years are highly profitable, others highly unprofitable.
1: he fought everything, would not change. He lost his dairy when milk prices fell two years ago.

2: he made drastic changes to feeding and watering among other scheduling. He produces the top 2% quality milk in the state now. He has reduced his loss of over 100k/w to a loss of less than 4k/m (prices are still down). When he can, he purchases additional quota from dairys that are going under and he will either lease them out if unused or produce more. When prices go up again, he will make greater profits than ever.

point is farmers who adapt and take advantage of said studies and regulations generally make higher profits than those that whine all day and keep doing business as usual. In this case, less fertilizer and less fuel to plow is less cost for the same result.
07:06 PM on 01/05/2011
Farmers haven't been tilling just for the hell of it, or to thumb their noses at people who know everything there is to know about farming, yet still don't farm themselves(might you be in that category??). Tillage has been necessary for some years because the tools and technology to make no till work weren't there. No till is a work in progress. I can't understand why there always has to be an element on Huff post that insist everything farmers have ever done has been because of some plot to kill the planet. Why would any of us want to do that?