Farm science.

Gawddawggonnit

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Who spreads what by sector

How could Teagasc come up with those figures when they’ve no idea how much fert is imported into Ireland?

ganmo

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

How could Teagasc come up with those figures when they’ve no idea how much fert is imported into Ireland?

probably just data from their own clients

yosemitesam1

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

How could Teagasc come up with those figures when they’ve no idea how much fert is imported into Ireland?

Would you think that there's much more than what they say?

Buford T. Justice XIX

Well, here's a turn up for the books. It may turn out that the methane increase in the atmosphere comes from sources other than ruminants according to NASA. Fires and fossil fuels look to be responsible.

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/jpl/nasa-led-study-solves-a-methane-puzzle

Water John

Very good article. Great you spotted it. It's an area that needs more research. We need to invest in it, or the wrong clients may end up, paying the GHG emissions.

Buford T. Justice XIX

I'm including a link to the Times here which you might not be able to access but Dr. Michael Mosley has an article about cows milk being an excellent source of iodine.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/so-long-soya-why-you-need-cows-milk-0ls0dclgm

He will be talking about this on BBC2 tomorrow night at 8.30pm in 'Trust me, I'm a doctor' as well.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Here's an interesting one, using fungi to repair cracks in concrete. Early stages yet but interesting direction.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fungi-can-help-concrete-heal-its-own-cracks/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sa-editorial-social&utm_content&utm_term=chemistry_partner_&sf180469539=1

Waffletraktor

http://www.picquery.com/atlantic-oscillation_d1TsqbjnD93ML8xlGUhZFuSyOWV6KEeKkLt3vrjkuMQ/
Today we learned the expected weather for the summer is controlled directly by the Atlantic sea surface tempature.

Say my name

Capturing nitrous oxide emissions and utilizing more nutrients from outdoor slurry lagoons.

http://www.beefmagazine.com/equipment/research-suggests-biochar-could-be-game-changer-manure-storage

bogman_bass

Not really farm science per say but I don't know where else to put it.
Yara are using the first ever autonomously docking ship to move fertilizer

Say my name

A study about reducing Nitric Oxide emissions from farmland.
Biochar was shown to reduce NO emissions from farmland to 0% in some cases depending on char used, soil type.
This is important as it would reduce the amount of artificial nitrogen needed to be spread on farmland. So cost saving.
A human benefit is a reduction in nitric oxide being the catalyst for smog formation.

https://www.foodandfarmingfutures.co.uk/PrestoMobile#/details/ZWVhNzBlY2QtZWJjNi00YWZiLWE1MTAtNWExOTFiMjJjOWU1LjE0MDk2

ganmo

Isn’t biochar just charcoal?

Say my name

ganmo wrote: »

Isn’t biochar just charcoal?

The word biochar gets thrown around way too loosely.
It can mean charcoal depending on who's using the word. But with all the different biomass/feedstocks that are used its better and should just be called char.
Charcoal should really just be used for char made from oak trees or other trees that by it's name was a replacement/predecessor for coal in the smelting process or even for your bbq.

Biochar should really just be used to describe char that has
A) been through an animal's digestive system and picked up all the bacteria and nutrients.
Been mixed with dung in a compost heap and picked up all the bacteria and nutrients.
C) Been inoculated with bacteria and/or fungi.
D) Been in one of those kon tiki retorts and the farmer has added nutrients and bacteria through the water to quench the retort and added that way.

But in the above study I'd say it was more than likely plain char was used but from different feedstocks.
Char from livestock manure still excites people and it would be the best for land if it wasn't going to be innoculated like I described above.

Bord na Mona looks like they want to get into the action in this country which to me sounds bonkers as peat is already a stable carbon and should be left where it is. But perhaps more than likely they're combining it with power generation. So..
The best source imo is farmer own grown trees on their own land and in 2nd would be trees from other sources here private plantations, Coillte, etc.
But trees make the best biochar from I've read and hardwood would be the king I think with the smaller gaps in the char.

But it's only in the last few years it's gaining traction and being used mostly as an extra from biomass power generation.
But the bord na Mona development or potential development. I wouldn't be a fan of.

I'll add this in here as it explains a bit more of what I've been harping on about.
It's a multi country, multi disciplinary recent research on biochar and just a snapshot into what happens when it's mixed with (as they used) compost.
https://nationalmaglab.org/fieldsmagazine/archives/esprit-de-char

Say my name

I'll stick this in here as there's an element of science in this.

"A Post Paris Literature Review of Negative Emissions Technology and Potential for Ireland"

Every farmer in the country should read this and be informed.
It mentions forestry, soil carbon sequestration and biochar and potential payments to incentivise farmers to help meet Ireland's carbon targets.
It's only a short read of over 300 pages but will/should impact agriculture in Ireland from now till eternity.

The link is in the Twitter post.
AgriChar (@AgriChar_RG) Tweeted:
Glad to see #Biochar part of the solutions being analyzed for #Carbon #sequestration for #Ireland. Hopefully will soon get to the #IPCC #6thAR #Negative #emissions #ClimateAction #climatechange https://t.co/xghomjwr0Y https://t.co/kDV7bhMMYJ https://twitter.com/AgriChar_RG/status/963354054960254976?ref_src=twcamp%5Eshare%7Ctwsrc%5Em5%7Ctwgr%5Eemail%7Ctwcon%5E7046%7Ctwterm%5E2

yosemitesam1

This study shows nitrogen use efficiency is around 23% with another study quoted in it on more intensive farms coming out at 19% (2 cow/ha versus 2.4). Compared to around 40% for systems more reliant on maize in france.
So for every 1 kg of nitrogen applied, only 230g of that are ending up in product, and 150-170g of that is in milk.

Gawddawggonnit

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

This study shows nitrogen use efficiency is around 23% with another study quoted in it on more intensive farms coming out at 19% (2 cow/ha versus 2.4). Compared to around 40% for systems more reliant on maize in france.
So for every 1 kg of nitrogen applied, only 230g of that are ending up in product, and 150-170g of that is in milk.

Where does the unused N go?

What about 3cows+/ha and under derogation?

Edit.
Now I understand your comment that J. Humphreys should know better...indeed he should if it’s the same man that put his name to this paper.

Jesus wept.

yosemitesam1

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Where does the unused N go?

What about 3cows+/ha and under derogation?

Edit.
Now I understand your comment that J. Humphreys should know better...indeed he should if it’s the same man that put his name to this paper.

Jesus wept.

Who knows where all the extra goes, can't be directly traced to surface water so who cares?
Intensive grass will always be a disaster from an n use efficiency point of view, it's just not possible for a cow to process all that nitrogen...

Gawddawggonnit

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Who knows where all the extra goes, can't be directly traced to surface water so who cares?
Intensive grass will always be a disaster from an n use efficiency point of view, it's just not possible for a cow to process all that nitrogen...

Was speaking to a fellow expat lately from the north, and in good grass country...problem with grass is it needs so much N, he mused...

I’ll do some research from this side. The frogs would WANT to find the excess N...as distinct from the out of sight, out of mind school of science...

Say my name

The only one's concerned about improving utilisation of nitrogen on grassland on here are the one's who don't use it. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Two words that every farmer should know in the future (or actually now) Albrecht and biochar.

charolais0153

Say my name wrote: »

The only one's concerned about improving utilisation of nitrogen on grassland on here are the one's who don't use it. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Two words that every farmer should know in the future (or actually now) Albrecht and biochar.

Albrecht as in the aldi crowd? Or is it soil test system

Buford T. Justice XIX

Mod note: Folks, we'll leave it there, please, and move quickly along, OK?

Thanks in advance,

Buford T. Justice

Gawddawggonnit

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/attachment.php?attachmentid=442473&d=1519300877


Reposted so as the research could be discussed.

Gawddawggonnit

https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/bix164/4831124

yosemitesam1

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/advance-article/doi/10.1093/biosci/bix164/4831124

"The only practice that will consistently decrease N losses at all locations, by all pathways and for all forms of N, is reduction in N input rates"

It's so simple it couldn't possibly be the way to go! Much better for our scientists to be playing around with urease inhibitors and other fairy dust to make try and make the current system less bad instead of good.

yosemitesam1

Say my name wrote: »

The only one's concerned about improving utilisation of nitrogen on grassland on here are the one's who don't use it. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Two words that every farmer should know in the future (or actually now) Albrecht and biochar.

I think a respect for ecology and how it relates to productiveness will be more important, across soils, disease management and grass management. Yield mightn't be as high as it could possibly be but greater stability in the long-term...


Edit, used to Hassel the aul lad here to get fert out, luckily I was never tied to believing in the experts so much that everything couldn't be questioned.

einn32

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

I think a respect for ecology and how it relates to productiveness will be more important, across soils, disease management and grass management. Yield mightn't be as high as it could possibly be but greater stability in the long-term...


Edit, used to Hassel the aul lad here to get fert out, luckily I was never tied to believing in the experts so much that everything couldn't be questioned.

Simple farming will eventually come as modern farming is doomed to fail. Too much reliance on oil. We already see issues with disease control. All this pressure for growth and production seems to ignore the environmental impact. Anyway the end result is more food produced for very little return.

Reseeding of grassland is a complete disaster too for ecosystems.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Quoting a tweet linking to an article on Carbon sequestration and beef finishing.

https://twitter.com/TamarHaspel/status/967529334444515328?ref_src=twcamp%5Ecopy%7Ctwsrc%5Eandroid%7Ctwgr%5Ecopy%7Ctwcon%5E7090%7Ctwterm%5E1

Say my name

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

I think a respect for ecology and how it relates to productiveness will be more important, across soils, disease management and grass management. Yield mightn't be as high as it could possibly be but greater stability in the long-term...


Edit, used to Hassel the aul lad here to get fert out, luckily I was never tied to believing in the experts so much that everything couldn't be questioned.

There's a hell of a lot that people need to learn about growing grass and what the grass actually needs to grow.

You'll know from reading my posts that I largely paddle my own canoe when it comes to growing grass and I'll take any information I can and try it out for myself.
Life's too short not to is my motto.

I alluded to Albrecht before and I'm beginning to firmly believe he had the soil science and ratios for the different elements worked out for grass.
Then I take a little bit from Elaine Ingham too when she mentions that a plant needs every available element in small portions to grow properly. It's kind of how I went down the road I'm going.

I got soil samples done across the whole farm lately using the Albrecht testing system and you can see the difference in fields where the ratios are off.

This day of depending on something wholey out of a bag is gradually changing for me. It might take me a lifetime to perfect and have the perfect soil but I'll enjoy the journey.

Just a little on what I've done and the results. All the land came back low in Boron on the Albrecht soil test for grass.
The fields that are lowest for boron have the worst and most burnt grass atm. There's one especially so that's high in calcium and low in Boron.
Now I've spread dolerite dust on all the land now but the best so far is the reseed that got 3t tilled into it. Dolerite would contain all the elements on earth including all the heavy metals. Now Ingham would tell you that soil needs these as well in small proportions for a healthy soil and healthy plant. Most people would gawp if you told them that but yet have no fear of eating a fish which is full of every available element from it's environment including the heavy metals.
Now a guess from me would be that dolerite could be harmful if your soil is high already in Boron but if it's low then I see no harm.
Back to the reseed I'm grazing it away atm and it's as green as anything with no sign of burning. I believe the dolerite has been an awful help to the grass. I did spread slurry on it just on the opening date as well but from looking at neighbours reseeds who spread at the same time. Their's have gone back and mine haven't.
I'm going to reseed more land this year and plan on spreading 5t/ac and tilling in based on the soil sample results for that field.
I believe I have hit on something that suits my soil. The soil here would I'd classify as a hungry soil, high in potash low in phosphorus low in Boron high in magnesium usually low in calcium but depends on your liming applications and if near marl low in sulphur.

A perfect soil for grass I'd classify that must be near perfect and naturally formed is soil near galbally and soil south of adamstown co.wexford. This is soil formed from volcanic intrusions to the surface. This belt actually runs and pops up from Waterford to north Wexford. This soil in theory should be full of every available element like I mentioned. I can guarrantee you though that it's a miracle to look at this land now where other grass on land is burning back and theirs stays green for longer.
There's a lot more I believe to soil than fertiliser yosemitesam.
Anyway ramble over.:p

Gawddawggonnit

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Quoting a tweet linking to an article on Carbon sequestration and beef finishing.

https://twitter.com/TamarHaspel/status/967529334444515328?ref_src=twcamp%5Ecopy%7Ctwsrc%5Eandroid%7Ctwgr%5Ecopy%7Ctwcon%5E7090%7Ctwterm%5E1

A very good paper on the benefits of the paddock or rotational system of grazing over the “let ‘em wander system”.

However the paper falls short in an Irish intensive grazing system because the research was on organic grassland that had not received any fertilizer or pesticides (inc herbicides I’m assuming) for greater than seven years, and for the duration of the study. The sward was predominantly alfalfa (lucerne) with a mix of cold season grasses...

The feedlot results assumed soil erosion/ degradation and the use of organic manure and artificial fertilizer...


Firing out a hospital pass to modern technology won’t, imho, fix our current issues with environmental pollution. Modern technology is outstanding in fairness but asking it to cure the ills of an ailing planet is asking too much...
Seawater and other magic potions are only deflecting the discussion.

feargale

I'm off cow's milk, butter, cheese etc.. Can anybody tell me if there is goat's butter and where it can be got? Thanks.