BIOMA$$

Dale Cowan Senior Agronomist, AGRIS Cooperative

Peter Johnson Cereal Specialist, OMAF/MRA

Buck$ or Bunk?

Emerging Opportunity on Crop Biomass

• Emerging market to use crop residues and purpose grown crops for cellulosic ethanol and sugar

• Cellulosic sugar can be used to produce higher value  “Green  Chemicals”  that  otherwise  would    come from crude oil

• Succinic acid • Proposed plant in Sarnia to convert sugars to

succinic acid • End users lined up to use the final product

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_ItEhCrLoQ&list=PLE2DBD6E94D67397B

Project Overview • A project was undertaken last year by OFA • Collect information on baling corn stover • 3 sites and cooperators • One contractor • Field operation costs –cutting, raking, baling • Yields- stacks covered and uncovered • Stover Content- tested every 2 months • Testing Stover for sugar yields • Economic assessment and business case

Clipping corn stalks

Baling

Raking

Spring harvest Site 2 and 3 : 10 Wheel V Rake - 18 foot swath

Piles for Site 2 and 3 located in same spot

Cooperators • Dan Douglas – contractor and cooperator • Dairy farmer, custom operator • Graham McLean • Beef and cash crops • Ian McLean • Beef and cash crops

What questions would you have?

• If a person knocked on your door and wanted to buy your cornstalks? • Agronomic? • Economic? • Logistical? • Sustaining soil quality?

Management and Soil C Content

//

Intensive Ag begins

Management Changes

Stover removal

Offsetting Practices (no till, cover crops, diverse rotations, etc.)

No Offsetting Practices

Time

?

Soil

carb

on c

onte

nt

//

Intensive Ag begins

Management Changes

Stover removal

Offsetting Practices (no till, cover crops, diverse rotations, etc.)

No Offsetting Practices

Time

?

How much stover do you have? • How would you calculate that ?

• Yield index • Above ground? • What is below ground? • What yields did you get from the project?

Site

Weight of bale

lbs % H2O

100%

DM #

Bales/ac

Grain Yield bu/ac

Total estimate

Stover lbs

Actual Stover

Remove %

Remove

1F 730 30 508 6.5 198 11,088 3,303 30

1S 440 10 395 6 198 11,088 2,371 21

2S 440 6.6 411 5.4 200 11,200 2,220 20

3S 440 4.7 419 4.1 190 10,640 1,720 16

Harvest Data

What is in it for nutrients? • What is being removed for nutrients ?

• Any guesses?

• $$$$?

• Any differences in timing of harvest?

• Fall higher or lower?

• Spring higher or lower?

Nutrient Value differences Fall vs Spring at Site 1

Significant reduction in potassium content. Potassium will readily leach from corn stalks. We usually estimate 90% returned to the soil this analysis suggest 80%.

Kg per tonne Total Nutrient cost/te Site Timing N% P% K% N P2O5 K2O

1 Fall 0.82 0.08 0.62 8.20 1.84 7.44 $23.32

1 Spring 0.76 0.05 0.14 7.60 1.15 1.68 $14.85

2 Spring 0.75 0.07 0.19 7.50 1.61 2.28 $16.07

3 Spring 0.78 0.03 0.05 7.80 0.69 0.60 $13.24

What does the field look like after harvest?

• How many trips over the field?

• Soil conditions?

• What if it is too wet?

• What were the experiences in this project?

Site 2 & 3: no till planted to soybeans right after bales were removed

Dry soil conditions carried equipment well

Sustaining soil quality • How much soil organic matter (SOM) is lost each year?

• What are your answers?

• How do I calculate the amount of SOM I may have?

• Soil test results

• Do the math- 4% SOM How much and what is the annual

loss?

Sustainability – Impact on Soil Organic Matter (SOM)

Site Grain Yield

bushels Total

Stover lbs Harvest

Removal lbs

Est soil OM loss lbs/acre

Gain or (loss)

lbs/acre

Breakeven removal

lbs/ac

1 198 9300 3,300 1,200 0 3300

2 202 9558 2,219 1,140 327 3854

3 190 8906 1,719 1,050 389 3664

What does poor soil quality look like?

• Drainage • Ponding • Compacted • Crusted • Slow to dry • Delayed planting • Lumpy seed bed • More replants • Uneven crops • Delayed maturity • Yearly yield swings • Low yields

The Value of Crop Residues and SOM

• A long standing knowledge base of the importance of returning crop residue to the soil to build SOM

• Lower bulk density • aeration • Water stable aggregates • Better soil structure • Improve infiltration rates • Improve moisture holding capacity • Increase plant available water • Buffer soil reactions • Storehouse of nutrients • Increase consistency of crop yields

Sustainability –Value of SOM • Total potential Stover yields calculated by using Yield

Indexes (0.5) • Annual loss of SOM varies 0.5 to 3% • Retention of crop residues and other organic wastes

are 10 to 20% • Soil with 3% SOM would lose 300 lbs to 1800 lbs per

acre each year • 1000 lbs of residue would result in retention of 100 to

200 lbs of SOM • Therefore to maintain SOM at 3% at 1.5% loss and

using 15% retention requires 6000 lbs per acre of residue each year to sustain present levels

Sustainability – Impact on Soil Organic Matter (SOM)

Site Grain Yield

bushels Total

Stover lbs Harvest

Removal lbs

Est soil OM loss lbs/acre

Gain or (loss)

lbs/acre

Breakeven removal

lbs/ac

1 198 9300 3,300 1,200 0 3300

2 202 9558 2,219 1,140 327 3854

3 190 8906 1,719 1,050 389 3664

Accounting for all the biomass • Above ground residue estimated by yield

index of 0.5 • At 0.5 yield index every pound of grain

represents a pound of stover • Corn has equal biomass below ground • Soybeans have 20% more ( 2700+ 3240) • Winter Wheat has 60% more below

ground (5400+ 8640)

Value of Crop Rotation • Corn, Soybeans, Winter Wheat • Continuous corn • Soybeans and wheat • Value of living roots for long periods of time in the crop

rotation • New thinking is considering that crop residues are rather short

term affect in building SOM in the long term (4 to 5 years) • The compounds produced from root exudates may account for

half of the active SOM • Some lignin is consumed in one year • Some simple sugars last decades • Current thinking is lignin last forever and sugars are consumed

by soil bacteria and fungi rather quickly

Crop Rotation Impacts on SOM

Including below ground Biomass **15% retention

Crop

Grain Yield

bushels

Total Stover

lbs Harvest

Removal lbs

Est soil OM loss lbs/acre

**Gain or (loss)

lbs/acre

Only 10% retention and 2.5% OM loss

Corn 198 18603 3,300 1,200 1099 (469)

Soybean 45 5940 ------ 1,200 (310) (1,466)

W. wheat 90 11860 2,000 1,200 279 (1014)

Net 36394 (5,300) (3,600) 1068 ( 2949)

Crop Rotation Effects on SOM Crop Average gains or

losses SOM lbs / acre (loss)

Corn 695

Soybean (709)

Winter wheat (121)

Middle of the road values from previous table on SOM losses and gains

Crop Rotation Effects on SOM • 22 years of SOM research at Elora resulted in 2.25%

SOM loss and 10% - 20% retention • In SW Ontario with longer/warmer season less mixed

farming more soybeans we could be in the last column • 2 years of Soybeans and 1 year of wheat is far more

alarming than 1 year of corn stover removal • Apart from supplying the demands of a biomass industry;

to build SOM levels and improve soil quality do we need to grow more corn per acre and more acres of corn?

• The only crop with the ability to increase SOM substantially

Utilizing Cover Crops to Keep

Our Soil Protected

Shannon Osborne Mike Lehman, Tom Schumacher, Walter Riedell,

Amber Hammerbeck, Sarah Stetson, and Joe Pikul

Residue Removal

• 1995-2000 – Alfalfa under No-Till (NT)

• Established 2000

• Corn Residue Removal

• Crop Rotation

• No-Tillage

• Cover Crops (2005)

Experimental Design

• Randomized complete block design (3 reps) • Split-plot design

• Whole Plot (residue removal) – HRR (All residue removed by a silage cutter) – MRR (Grain harvested, residue chopped and baled) – LRR (Grain harvested, residue remain on surface)

• Split-plot (Fall 2005) – Cover crop – No cover crop

• Two-year corn/soybean rotation – No-till

Cover Crop Growth

• Soybean Phase

Plant residue and other carbon inputs are important to soil health

Above and below-ground biomass becomes various pools of SOM

Low residue removal

Medium residue removal

High residue removal

3890 kg C ha-1

10,469 kg C ha-1

5748 kg C ha-1

Erodible fraction ‡ (top 5 cm of soil)

‡EF – Erodible fraction is the mass fraction of soil <0.84 mm in diameter.

Residue Removal 2008 2012 2012

Combine No Cover Crop Cover Crop

LRR 93 85 75

MRR 154 130 150

HRR 184 307 161

Pr > F 0.001 0.001 0.001

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1 2 3 4 5 6

LRR MRR HRRSO

M, g

/kg

SOM

, g/k

g

2012 following 12 years,

6 complete rotations

No Cover Crop

Cover Crop

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.9

LRR MRR HRR

Soil

Carb

on ,

%

Residue Removal

Soil Carbon, 0-3 in

No Cover

Cover Crop

Soil Health Score - Elora

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Alf-alf-corn-corn

Contalfalfa

Cont corn C-C-O(RC)-B(RC)

C-C-O-B Corn-corn-soy-

soy

Corn-corn-soy-w wheat

C-C-S-WW(RC)

Conventional No-till

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

Irst y

ear c

orn

yiel

d (b

u/ac

@15

.5%

)

MP

NT

Corn Yields at Elora 2012

186

157

175 173b

198

162

184 181a

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

Grai

n Yi

eld

(bu/

ac)

2010 2011

Corn Yields after Wheat +/- Red Clover, Ridgetown 2010-12

C-S-

W

C-S-

W(r

c)

2012

C-S-

W

C-S-

W(r

c)

C-S-

W

C-S-

W(r

c)

C-S-

W

C-S-

W(r

c)

Ave

133c

150b 154 152b

161c

150b 156b

159 156b

183b 178a

186a

157

175a

195a

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

180

190

200

Grai

n Yi

eld

(bu/

ac)

2009 2010 2011

The “Rotation  Effect”  on  corn  yields Ridgetown 2009-13

C-C

C-S

C-S-

W

2012

Note: Mean separation within year (p=0.05)

C-C

C-S

C-S-

W

C-C

C-S

C-S-

W

C-C

C-S

C-S-

W

C-C

C-S

C-S-

W

2013

Hooker (UG Ridgetown

50c

42b

60b

73c

61b

55b

43b

62b

78b

60b 60a

47a

69a

86a

65a

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Rotation

Seed

Yie

ld (b

u/ac

)

2009

Averaged Across Tillage and Corn N treatments at Ridgetown. Est. 1991; letters within year statistically different at p=0.05 Source: Hooker et al., 2011 (UofG Ridgetown) Note: Mean separation within year (p=0.05)

C-S

C-S-

W

S-S

The  “Rotation  Effect”  on  Soybean  Yields Ridgetown 2009-13

2010 2011 2012 2013

C-S

C-S-

W

S-S

C-S

C-S-

W

S-S

C-S

C-S-

W

S-S

C-S

C-S-

W

S-S

Next Steps • Establish a market for cellulosic sugar

production $$$$$ • Need a facility to process corn stalks • Create the value chain for crop residues • Look at the total impact on field management • Increase harvest efficiencies drive out costs • Develop a matrix table of yield vs breakeven

stover removal thresholds • Decide on a business structure

Future Opportunities

� New harvesting equipment and logistic processes

� Sustainable harvest – field advisors � Large acreages have high yields � Incorporating process to remove NPK � Lower operating & capital costs as

technology improves/emerges

45

Thank You to the following:

Investment in this project has been provided by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada through the Canadian Agricultural Adaptation Program (CAAP). In Ontario, this program is delivered by the Agricultural Adaptation Council.

46

Volunteers – Soil Carbon Study • Joint project OFA/Harrow Research Station

• Funded through Natural Resources Canada via AAFC • Analysis of core soil samples for carbon content

• 12 inch deep samples taken by AgriFood Labs • Confidential analysis at the Harrow Research Station

• Need farm volunteers to make cornstalk fields available • Area of interest is Oxford/Brant westward

• Area of interest is farms that have removed cornstalk in past but do not utilize manure • Contact Charlie Lalonde at end of session or leave

name and phone number on cards