|
|
| Hello folks!
A week or two ago, I posted a message seeking farmers or ag professionals that would be willing to communicate with my students about a wide range of soil fertility topics.
Thanks to all who responded.
I would like to add an additional interview topic - Anhydrous ammonia.
Assuming that enough students are interested, we are going to spend a little time this semester exploring why farmers choose to or not to use anhydrous ammonia.
Some of the questions we will consider are:
What does it really cost to use anhydrous when you consider the horsepower/fuel to pull an anhydrous bar, the cost of the technology needed to achieve uniform application, inevitable losses when fall applied, the cost of inhibitors (e.g., N -Serve), the risks associated with accidents? risks associated with theft?
Is there evidence that anhydrous causes harm to soil biology? and/or soil structure? I'm searching but haven't found any evidence in the scientific literature yet.
How are farmers that don't fall apply anhydrous able to get N applied to large acreages of corn ground?
Are there other issues (e.g., regulations) that influence farmers decisions about using anhydrous?
Looking forward to reading your thoughts.
Joel
WIU Ag Dept. |
|
| |
|
| Joel here in eastern washington we rely on center pivot irrigation 100 percent for our water needs so we fertigate to minimize nitrate leaching and maximize uptake by the plants. We are one of the few that apply anhydrous to our corn. Most of the other farmers don't want the risk of injury or don't have the time to apply the fert. but since we are usually dam er dikeing to privent water runoff any way, we mounted the anhydrous setup to our shanks of the dikker which are stronger than conventional anhydrous shanks so we can go a little deeper and faster. plus we are serving 2 goals at once.
Cost is a big incentive the anhydrous here is cheaper than others, and i believe the corn responds better to it than other fertilizers unit for unit. |
|
| |
|
southern MN | Someday regulations may make it too costly or difficult to use.
The added spring tillage is a bonus for me, wet cold soils, I've done very late fall application, but much of my farm is too wet - spring snow melt puddles up - to do fall application.
I'm not afraid to sidedress, tho i think applying before planting is better.
Theft - I try to apply it all when the tanks show up, have kept going until 5:00am to usae it up. My farm is centrally located, I wouldn't leave tanks sit around in view. I'll pull them out back out of site if I have to keep them a few days, like last spring with the rains.
Applying N is going to take; weight on the field, time, & effort, fuel. Don't see much difference from one to the other.
--->Paul |
|
| |
|
Dalton, OH | For me its safety and convience. I'll pay more for 28%N. Also, most of my N goes on sidedressed with a cultivator-1000+acres on a 6-row rig every year!!! We are able to cut our N rates by 25% or more by sidedressing and cultivating. Also, maybe somebody can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Anhydrous was used somewhere, Vietnam?, in a war to make runways. They injected it to compact the soil so airplanes could land on it. If that's the case, I don't need any extra compaction on my farm. I've also always wondered what it does to soil life, microbes, etc? If its so unsafe for us it can't be that much safer to the soil life. Just some thoughts. Not many people fall apply N here as there is too much chance of it leaching till spring. The one Co-op does lots of spring application of anhydrous for farmers. Hope this helps. |
|
| |
|
Ripley, Ontario Canada | It is not an option around here. There is no suppler close enough to be practical. Regulations for the tanks and handling have just made it too expensive here. |
|
| |
|
Eastern Iowa | Basically, we have be using it because it has been cheaper. |
|
| |
|
Lapel, In | The big issue today is if the railroads should refuse to ship it in the near future, because of the liability issue. Traditionally , because of its concentration, the other forms of N could never compete as well as its cheaper manufacturing costs . I am concerned that the price advantage may soon disappear. Granted anhydrous has been a big user of soil calcium , but that has never ,in my opinion, been a big concern since it always seemed to be one of the main reasons we saw an additional yield response to using anhydrous ammonia over using other forms of N. |
|
| |
|
Elizabethtown,KY | No dealers here handle it and even if they did I wouldn't use it as I'm all no-till and don't like the dangers associated with AA. |
|
| |
|
Lee Co | I currrently use 100% NH3 in the spring w/o n-serve. in yield checks here, we find no benifit to the stabilizer. We use a 17 knife - 42' appplicator pulled by a 350 hp 4 wd tractor, in the area of 6.5 MPH and can cover in the area of 200 acres /day. we use a raven monitor to cotrol the rates and guidance to evenly cover the field. by pulling tanks on duel trailers we reduce the amount of time needed to switch tanks and even at a relitivly hi rate of N (240 units) have had very good luck with the system. We do see a drop in soil Ph with the rates of N and the corn on corn rotations but by 2-3 years between soil tests we can stay on top of the Ph issue. Many years ago the old farmers said the soils in this area never needed lime because the soils were full of "shells" and this kept the Ph up but over the years we have had to lime altho not to the amounts on lightere soils. As for saftey, you do need to respect it, and be cautious with the proper equipment but as for theft we don't make a practice of leaving full tanks around longer than needed. |
|
| |
|
Moweaqua, IL | We are 100% fall applied NH3 with N-Serve, saving this year, which we'll have to side dress due to fall weather. We also VRA NH3 using the DAP appplication (broadcast applied) and crop removal from yield data. We plant in the NH3 applicator knife path. This has work pretty well for us for 6 years running. I don't feel any less safe handling NH3 than the other chemicals on the farm. As far as horsepower v. bar size, most dealers have a NH3 bar to fit your operation. |
|
| |
|
Lapel, In | To each his own. No-tiller here too, R&G. Almost 20 years now and I have always used in .Were you in Indy this last week ? |
|
| |
|
NW IL | The reason we use NH3 is mostly due to a lower cost. I think it will always be cheaper. All current forms of nitrogen are made from NH3. It takes additional processing to get a 28 or 32%or urea. The 82 % concentration also will help keep the cost lower due to less transportation costs and less storage costs. The cost of application equipment is really not that much if you can spread it over enough acres. So far in my lifetime I have never seen another form of nitrogen (in our area) figure out to a cheaper cost per acre. I doubt it will change. If you do some reading on the haber process and then look at RenTech's web site they have a flow chart of how all the different nitrogen fertilizers are made from NH3. The biggest change that will ever come for nitrogen fertilizer is that we will make it on the farm someday and bypass all the middlemen, unfortunately that is quite a while in the future. |
|
| |
|
Oswald No-Till Farm Cleghorn, IA | On NH3,
It is our preferred source of N for a number of reasons. My Dad remembers going to ammonia meetings back in the late 1950's-1960's and the optimums discussed at those meetings are still the same though we stretch into fall application as part of strip till and earlier corn planting than in years past.
1- N is at depth. In the sometimes dry western corn belt, this is a good thing. In 2007, my sidedress liquid N plots were 20 bu/ac less than fall+ planter 20#. Rain stopped right after sidedressing. and the corn suffered.
2- N is banded..... a good thing.... concentrated in less soil volume. Unlike sprayed on 28% or broadcast urea which is a horizontal band.
3- Concentrated form of N, less gallons handled.
4- Some suggest ammonium form better for corn. (Charles Tai, Purdue, 1980's I think)
5 "Here" pipelines and tankers handle most of it.
6- Have my own toolbars and controllers (can be used for both liquid or ammonia, strip or sidedress).
7- Manly way to farm (big tractors, lots of iron, dangerous)
8- Believe that compaction (runway construction etc) is mostly a myth. Tillage is harder on the soil than ammonia.
9- liming behind ammonia not that much worse. Ammonium sulfate is worse I believe. Talk to a soil chemist.
Cons:
1- Manly way to farm (big tractors, lots of iron, dangerous)
2- Theft
3- Environmentalists target ammonia tanks in their advertising
4- requires soil incorporation (tillage via knife)
5- control equipment is expensive
6- gassing can burn emerged crop if done improperly
In summary, we (Dad and I) like AA and hope to keep using it as the primary N source on our farm. I think the benefits outweigh the negatives and believe that our yields would be somewhat lower (on average over the years) and our costs would be higher if we had to switch to urea or liquids. We hope that the regulators and nitrogen production companies don't take it away.
Tom |
|
| |
|
| AA Advantages
- I think number 1 in our area is being able to plant the corn early without stopping to apply N preplant
- 2 cheapest N cost
- 3 fuel costs are very close to .6 gals per acre
- 4 up to 250 ac covered per day
- 5 reduced N rates with timely sidedressing and pre sidedress N test |
|
| |
|
Elizabethtown,KY | No Bob, my wife recently had surgery (actually 2 in 3 weeks time) so I don't need to be very far from home yet. I would like to attend one of these conferences someday though. |
|
| |
|
SWOH | We don't use it for the simple fact that we don't want to mess with the stuff. And we don't put any N on in the fall. We put N on in the spring as a pop up and then sidedress 28%. |
|
| |
|
SW North Dakota | We always use anhydrous. But we also only live 3 miles from the station. It has always been cheaper here and the yeilds have been good since we started using it. We apply it with the seed. |
|
| |
|
Little River, TX | I like anhydrous because of the logistics. I can put 400 lbs of N into my bermudagrass hay fields no problem with AA but need 1250 lbs of 32 to get the same amount of nitrogen out.
Advantage #2 is the ammonia will tie to the clay particles and become a slow release fertilizer. My bermudagrass fields have 50 meq/100g CEC. In theory a 50 CEC will hold 500 lbs of nitrogen. I have put 1500 lbs/A of AA into a test bermudagrass plot. Seven years later the hay production was just starting to go down. My cowboy math tells me this soil will hold 25 lbs of N for each meq/100g of CEC as long as it is anhydrous.
Advantage #3 is if I put my phosphate down in the same slot as the AA the phosphate will remain available longer than put down a slot with no ammonia.
Not only is this soil a heavy clay with a high CEC but it is also calcareous with 4% to 6% free lime to compliment the 7,000 ppm Ca reported by soil testing.
I figure working with anhydrous is safer than flying training missions in a B-52. Probably no more hazardous than driving to town for a haircut! |
|
| |
|
| I use NH3 because of the lower cost, and since I do much of my fertilizing for corn with side dressing, it's easier to use NH3 then liquid. |
|
| |
|
Schlegel Farms, Hagerstown Indiana | I used it until about six or seven years ago. That year the "druggies" were so prevalent that we had to lock the tanks in the barn at night. That was the final straw...I wasn't going to deal with them.
I used 28% for a couple years and now use 13%. It is a bye product from Eli Lilly when they make insulin. It's cost is between NH3 and 28%.
................................................Mark |
|
| |
|
| Detect a bit of bias against anhydrous. You have to make anhydrous before you can make anything else. Your students need to start here http://www.energy.iastate.edu/Renewable/ammonia/ammonia.htm Anhydrous defines a path to the hydrogen economy. The UP has a locomotive that runs on it. In one of the symposia, there is a review on the safety of anhydrous. Then, they need to go here http://www.isafarmnet.com/ and have them review several years worth of on-farm strip trial information comparing the efficacy of different forms of nitrogen. There are reasons why different forms of nitrogen have different efficiencies. While they are at it, they can look at the N-serve data to see if it makes any difference. Only reason to put N on in the Fall is because that is the way that Dad did it. |
|
| |
|
Colby, Kansas | I was a young, young pup the last time we used Anhy, so long ago that it was being put on with a tri-flex (an implement with three 5' sweeps for those not familiar).
Frame of Reference: Were in 80 bu corn country so the concentration impact of anhy vs. liquid or dry isn't a huge deal for us a given volume goes a lot farther for us than someone in the cornbelt. On irrigated ground fertigation is the way to go in terms of efficiency, timing, and eliminating involving a field operation. All of our N is applied at planting as 32% surface dribble approx 2.5 in from the seed slot.
Why we don't use Anhy (on the family farm)
1. Logistics: Many of the country elevator locations have quit their storage and nurse tanks, from our furthers field to NH3 supplier could be 30+ miles. We are spread out about 20 miles from furtherest point to furtherest point (which is fairly tightly grouped compared to our larger neighbors). The miles and labor it would take to pull tanks around and the associated liability of going up and down the road make it prohibitive. Even if we built our own bulk storage, it would still be an issue.
2. Safety:
3. No-Till: We've been no-till corn and sorghum since the late 70's and completely no-till since the mid 90's, not convienced there is a real good way to get anhy on in a no-till situation.
4. Convenience of liquid, its just easier to store, transport, and handle.
Why we don't use Anhy (on the experiment station)
1. Safety
2. Almost impossible to accurately meter at the plot scale
3. Convenience of liquid and dry
Lucas
Edited by LHaag 1/18/2009 21:05
|
|
| |
|
NW IL, Mercer County | Advantages:
1. Lower cost/unit N
2. Can be fall applied "here" (saves more work in spring time)
3. N-Serve shows positive yield response in both fall and spring trials
4. Can plant on top of fall NH3 strips
Disadvantages:
1. Can be dangerous without proper safety training and handling
2. Hilly terrain can make pulling tanks difficult
3. Hilly terrain can also make NH3 strips wash out with heavy rains if not contoured |
|
| |
|
Stoutsville, Ohio | We have used AA then 28% and are now back to AA. We switched to 28% because we could incorparate it with our chemicals and save a pass. Several years ago we had a field that had classic nitrogen deficency and was 100 bushels off the rest of the corn. We were billed for a full rate of 28%. We made the switch back then. I know what is being put on as I am doing it. Rate contol equipment is expensive but can be paid for in one warm day with overages. I think AA always shows off in a dry or wet year verses 28%. I spring apply sometimes as early as February if conditions are right. Cost is better than 28%. Handling AA makes you respect it. Always run till all tanks are empty, the druggies will still get enough to make meth from an empty tank and I dont have two worry about losing 2 ton in the air. Fuel usually runs about .5 gal acre with a 40 foot bar on our STX450Q. |
|
| |
|
| Hello Lon,
Thanks the input. I wasn't very familiar with anhydrous before arriving in Western Illinois but I don't think I am really biased against it.
My students are almost all from farms where fall applied anhydrous is the primary N source. My goal is for them to critically evaluate anhydrous as one option *and* then make good decisions about the best option(s) for their operations.
We are going to investigate anhydrous from many different angles:
agronomic issues
economic issues
safety issues
transportation issues
criminal justice issues
environmental issues
manufacturing issues
energy issues...
Joel
WIU Agriculture |
|
| |
|
| Thanks to everyone who has replied so far... the diversity of views expressed are exactly what I want my students to think about.
As has been mentioned, ammonia is a feedstock for all other synthetic forms of N so it should be the cheapest and most energy efficient to produce but this is not always the case.
The net energy consumed during the production of ammonium nitrate is actually less than the energy consumed during the production of ammonia - this is because oxidizing ammonia to nitrate actually gives off energy... this is why ammonia can be used as a fuel and why nitrifier bacteria in the soil do what they do.
Of course the amount of energy given off when ammonia is oxidized is much less then the energy required to synthesize ammonia.
Keep the ideas flowing... I might even assign this thread as a reading assignment :->
|
|
| |
|
| Are you telling us that producing nitric acid from ammonia and then reacting the nitric acid with additional ammonia to produce ammonium nitrate, and then removing the excess water and prilling (which takes more drying, cooling and coating) the melt takes less energy that just producing ammonia? |
|
| |
|
| Yes.. according to Yara... I should try to crunch the #s independently to see what I come up with.
|
|
| |
|
Watford City, ND | If you'd like to have a student ask me some questions in regards to AA. My experience is based on farming in western ND - 16" avg rainfall, primary small grains - single pass seeding with hoe drill. We use AA here because of cost and the simplicity of it - we band it when seeding. We cannot use no till here effectively because of excessive rocks. Transportation is not a huge issue, but theft can be. I can be much more through in an email or over the phone if someone would like. Good Luck! Marco |
|
| |
|
North End I-15 | Plus I am way far too attention defficit to handle AA . :<(
I apply all dry , in a one pass , high disturbance , direct seeding operation . Small grains , primarily Malt barley .
On occasion have some 46-0-0 spread/broadcast prior to seeding if N levels are real low .
Being a one person operation with wife as occasional helper I strive to keep all work to a minimun .
Being old and lazy helps . :>) |
|
| |
|
Near Richmond, IN | I basically quit NH3 for the same reasons, Ernie. I didn't have time to do it and couldn't get any help hired that would work with it, so I quit. Getting old and lazy is probably one of the biggest reasons for myself, also :-) |
|
| |
|
Archer Iowa | I stopped using it 16 years ago. Got a good smell of the stuff when unhooking the tank when empty. Hear to many stories of guys getting it on themselves and how it burned. The water packs on the tanks where not always filled or the hoses were plugged. Then was told by a really good chemist that helps make alot of the stuff the industry uses today that for each pound of NH3 that you put on it ties up 2.1 pounds of water soluable calcium. What i am using now does not burn if you get some on you or rust equipment. 20 to 25 gallon per arce so it is less gallons than 28%. It will not leach away. Soil works up better now, better roots,less N needed to grow the crop, better stalk quality. Can be used in many different ways. I am surprises that there is only one other person that is using a product somewhat like I am in this day of advanced techonagly. |
|
| |
|
Schlegel Farms, Hagerstown Indiana | , |
|
| |
|
Newfane NY | Tell us what it is. Since using Humates I am open to alot of differant things. That is since seeing what "odd stuff" does I am interested in many things to improve the farm.
John |
|
| |
|
Alton, Ia | LOL on # 7 pro # 1 con.
Tim Taylor would use AA!!!!! |
|
| |
|
Alton, Ia | John, there have been a lot of advances made in genetics, seed quality, etc. I am curious if the improvements you've seen are somewhat attributed to those, and maybe not so much dropping AA and going with your new product. Have you done any side by side tests, or aware of any? |
|
| |
|
Elizabethtown,KY | Let me add a couple of comments to my previous thread, I am a one man operation, we can't fall apply AA here as we are typically too warm, our soil types would leach too much too I suspect. I do have a neighbor who uses AA, but he owns his own storage tank and wagons, and has it trucked from a terminal 100 miles away. He used to put his on as sideress with a bar, but the last 2 years he has knifed it on pre-plant. |
|
| |
|
Brazilton KS | What exactly is it that you think 28% is made from? You are using NH3, you are just paying some middle men along the way. NH3 is as good or better then anything else for sidedressing.
|
|
| |
|
Brazilton KS | jbgruver - We are going to investigate anhydrous from many different angles: agronomic issues economic issues safety issues transportation issues criminal justice issues environmental issues manufacturing issues energy issues. .. Joel WIU Agriculture Agronomically: NH3 forces the user to apply it properly...in a band and at depth. It tends to show an advantage over other N forms but if you look at the details, I think most of the advantage is because the ammonia is usually the only thing tested which is applied properly. Spreading N on top is NOT the correct way to apply N, regardless of form.
Economically: NH3 is the best deal. Everything else is made from it, so if something else is cheaper it's an anomaly. Safety: NH3 does require proper handling and training. Transportation: NH3 requires handling less tonnage then any other N source. Criminal Justice: I'm not sure I understand how this is a farm problem. Environmental: Ammonia is less likely to be lost then any other form of N, assuming application methods which are the norm. Manufacturing: NH3 is the source of N regardless of what commercial N form you use. Other forms require further, unnecessary manufacturing processes. Energy: See manufacturing and transportation replies above.
|
|
| |
|
edgerton ks. | Scince I've heard the Airplane runway story. At least it's being updated though, last time I heard it told it was from the WWII era. Save your money use NH3. |
|
| |
|
SW MN and Gold Canyon AZ | I guess N is high enough ,why buy more expensive types of N?? Fall applied NH3 for this guy ,wouldn't have it any other way. Like tom said, sidedress and then no rain makes for poor corn.
I f one follows all the rules, gloves ,goggles, ect... I see no danger in NH3 ,just have to respect it though.
All these wonder products are just that ,you wonder if they work!!
All this garbage about compaction ,killing worms ect... is a bunch of nonsense. It all comes down to yield in the end. If I can get to 200 bu plus corn using fall applied N it must work right??? |
|
| |
|
Central, IL | Mleburn I could not have said it better myself. Farm average for 2008 was well over 200 BPA with all NH3 applied in the fall of 07. Freezing and thawing will take out a lot of compaction, no seed burn, plant into mellow soil, and dont have to worry about it drying out are a some advantages of fall application. 2000 galons of 28% on three wheels right before I plant never appealed to me either. Side dressing takes to much time and I dont like to run over any corn. This is what works for us in our area and I dont see it changing much. |
|
| |
|
Central ND | frank ks - 1/19/2009 17:46
Scince I've heard the Airplane runway story. At least it's being updated though, last time I heard it told it was from the WWII era. Save your money use NH3.
My uncle used to tell me NH3 stories about making airplane runways and was sure as heck his neighbors land was would soon be all shot /worthless and harder than cement chunks from the nh3 the neighbor used. LOL. ha ha ha..... That land is raising as good of crop as any 30 years later.I was once told that the Nh3 was used to run through cooling lines beneath a airstrip somewhere as a refrigerant to freeze the soft ground for a runway. Dont know if that si true or not.That would make more sense. A Comercial business cooling system in a cheese plant here still uses Anhydrous Ammona as a refrigerant. The compressor room always has a slight odor of NH3 in it. |
|
| |
|
| Lots of meat processing plants use NH3 as the refrigerant. Seems to work well between leaks.
Gerald J. |
|
| |
|
Finney county, kansas | Used it last year but had a yield drag compared to liquid on corn applied with a strip till rig in the fall. We had a 24 bushel differences may have been larger due to the soil type it was applied on but the yeild differences more than pays for the difference in cost and much safer and we can transport ourself from the supplier and get paid for hauling it ourselves from the supplier. |
|
| |
|
| We see just the opposite, yield drag with liquid compared to AA. The few times we have used liquid we have also seen lower amounts of available N in tissue tests.
Generally our AA is fall applied though on corn on corn I like to have a split application with the majority of N going down in the fall. We weren't able to get all our AA on last fall so I am going to try some urea this spring to finish out with. For 150# of N urea was about $14/ac cheaper than AA |
|
| |
|
Ilderton, Ontario | We here in SW Ontario use it exclusivlely as a side dress application. It is usually too wet, or too snowy in the fall for fall application. It is also not a recomended practice when spring side dress is an option. Being in a more temperate climate, we do not see the problem with drying soil after a side dress application. Having said that, the main reason we use it is because it is the cheapest form of N and is the most concentrated (less product handled). In a spring side dress application it allows us to first determine if we will be keeping our crop prior to the investment of N, in case soys, or edible beans is a better choice for replant. Spring application also allows you to fine tune the application. You can at very least reduce the amount by 10% since your application is very close in timelyness to the time the crop needs it, leaving the product less vulnerable to losses.
The whole horsepower arguement is old today in the presence of skip row applications. I have mentioned it before, but we are sidedressing 12 rows with a 4440, not exactly a big tractor by todays standards. We also don't use any high tech equipment. Just a squibb with hydraulic shut off, and constant speed. At sidedress time we are usually looking at 15-20 C temps so pressure is not an issue. |
|
| |
|
| Joel here in eastern washington we rely on center pivot irrigation 100 percent for our water needs so we fertigate to minimize nitrate leaching and maximize uptake by the plants. We are one of the few that apply anhydrous to our corn. Most of the other farmers don't want the risk of injury or don't have the time to apply the fert. but since we are usually dam er dikeing to privent water runoff any way, we mounted the anhydrous setup to our shanks of the dikker which are stronger than conventional anhydrous shanks so we can go a little deeper and faster. plus we are serving 2 goals at once.
Cost is a big incentive the anhydrous here is cheaper than others, and i believe the corn responds better to it than other fertilizers unit for unit.
Hi Doug me name is Tyler Richolson i am one of Joel's students here at WIU. i was very interested in what you had to say. i just visited Eastern Washington about 4 mouths ago. i was amazed at the farm practices i saw out there being from northern Illinois thing there were different from what i normal see. What tip of fertilizer do your nabers put on since you are one of the few that put on AA. were in Washington are you from when i was was out there i main saw wheat and barley being grown.
|
|
| |
|
| I'm a student in Joel's class and I wanted to remark on the usage of NH3. Yes 28% is derived from NH3 but it is safer to use. It is generally less volitile and this is why Pioneer's recent yield studies have shown that their top yielding fields have been side dressed with 28%. As far as cost effectiveness, my dad has only used liquid application of nitrogen in the springtime since he started in the late 70's. He has only saw benifit from using it becasue we use it on over 6,000 acres still today. |
|
| |
Why do you choose to or not to use anhydrous?
