URBANA, Ill. — A recent University of Illinois farmdoc webinar examined balancing profitability and sustainability when it comes to nitrogen management and the environment. The August 1 webinar, hosted by U of I farm economist Gary W. Schnitkey, along with Greg Goodwin and Louis Liva of Precision Conservation Management (PCM), also looked at potential and issues associated with carbon markets.

“We’re looking at both the economics of practices on farms as well as some of the environmental consequences,” said Schnitkey, referring to collaborative field testing between the U of I Department of Crop Sciences, Extension and PCM farmer-members that has taken place over the past nine years. “We’ve been examining tillage, cover crops and nitrogen (N) benchmarks.”

Corn tillage data has shown that the most intense systems are not the most profitable. When we begin looking at two-plus pass systems that have some sort of heavy tillage in them, we don’t see the profitability being as large as some of the less intense systems,” Schnitkey summarized. “The data illustrates that less intense systems are more profitable, and that more intense systems have the possibility of soil erosion and sequester-less carbon.”

No-till and one-pass systems showed around the same level of profitability, according to the field studies. Strip till systems are also more profitable than more intense systems, Schnitkey reported.

Interviews conducted with farmers who have operated the most profitable farms that utilize cover crops have helped the farmdoc-PCM team to identify best management practices for corn-into-soybean cover crop plantings. “The cover crop species of choice is cereal rye because it has a lower cost and it also can over-winter pretty easily,” said Schnitkey. “Broadcasting the (cover crop) seed with fertilizer has become more and more used; it provides pretty good emergence and also has the advantage of being faster than drilling.”

The key to success for this system is to plant soybeans early in the spring following the winter cover crop, according to U of I-PCM research. Termination of the cover crop can occur on either side of planting. There is less of a standard recommended system for cover crops going into corn from soybeans, Schnitkey noted. 

“There is a lot of work going on here. That system is a lot more difficult, and yield disadvantage is more of an issue than with corn going into soybeans,” he said.

As for N work, past and present research confirms that a big factor in profitability lies in keeping rates as close to MRTN (maximum return to nitrogen) as possible. The lower the ratio of N in soils, the greater the carbon sequestration. One-pass N systems were found to be more profitable than multiple-pass systems.

“Every time you apply N you incur cost. The second thing is that for whatever reason, our research shows that those who use (multiple-pass) systems tend to apply N at higher levels,” Schnitkey said. “When we look at the profitability in our dataset, we find that the higher profitability lies in the pre-plant or multiple side dress area. Those profitabilities were actually higher than fall-applied N, which has several issues including a tendency to apply more N than the MRTN.”

Schnitkey advised those farmers interested in greater profitability to lessen or eschew fall applications of N or utilize N inhibitors. However, N inhibitors can cost $13-$15 per acre and greatly reduce profitability.

“Again, what our data is suggesting is that pre-plant and side dressings are actually a bit more profitable, particularly if we can get those rates closer to MRTN,” he said.

PCM specialist Liva used his portion of the webinar to urge farmers to join forces with PCM, whose membership includes farmers in around 35 Illinois counties. In total, more than 500 farmers are currently enrolled in the program, which also encompasses several counties located near watersheds in Kentucky and Nebraska. Liva said the mission of PCM is to combine precision technology and data management with farm business and financials to help farmers manage, adopt, and adapt conservation practices while improving on-farm decision-making. 

Liva also dipped into the “carbon bucket” of available incentive programs for farmers through both the government and major corporations such as PepsiCo. He stressed the importance of securing a carbon intensity (CI) score to farmers interested in reaping the financial awards available through current carbon sequestration incentive programs.

“This is a whole-farm average score associated with your practices. This score can get you a premium on your bushels at the elevator. The CI score is something that is coming down the pipeline. These (scores) are funded through a 45-Z tax credit through federal government payments to ethanol plants to reduce their carbon. The big question here is what piece of that (credit) producers are going to get, so keep your eyes on CI scores going forward” Liva said. 

Liva urged all farmers to start working towards obtaining a positive CI score by improving their soils in order to keep up with consumer and corporate food trends and demands. “Even if you’re not doing carbon market programs now, get your data in order. It’s going to continue to keep getting more and more important moving forward,” he said. 

The webinar, Financial & Environmental Impact of Conservation Practices, can be viewed in its entirety at www.precisionconservation.org.