Effect of soil tillage on erosion and nutrient transport in plough layer runoff

Yhteenveto: Viljelymenetelmien vaikutus eroosioon ja ravinteiden huuhtoutumiseen

Ammonia emissions from pig and cattle slurry in the field and utilization of slurry nitrogen in crop production

Volatilization of ammonia (NH3) from animal manure is a major pathway for nitrogen (N) losses that cause eutrophication, acidification, and other environmental hazards. In this study, the effect of alternative techniques of manure treatment (aeration, separation, addition of peat) and application (broadcast spreading, band spreading, injection, incorporation by harrowing) on ammonia emissions in the field and on nitrogen uptake by ley or cereals was studied. The effect of a mixture of slurry and peat on soil properties was also investigated. The aim of this study was to find ways to improve the utilization of manure nitrogen and reduce its release to the environment. Injection into the soil or incorporation by harrowing clearly reduced ammonia volatilization from slurry more than did the surface application onto a smaller area by band spreading or reduction of the dry matter of slurry by aeration or separation. Surface application showed low ammonia volatilization, when pig slurry was applied to tilled bare clay soil or to spring wheat stands in early growth stages. Apparently, the properties of both slurry and soil enabled the rapid infiltration and absorption of slurry and its ammoniacal nitrogen by the soil. On ley, however, surface-applied cattle slurry lost about half of its ammoniacal nitrogen. The volatilization of ammonia from surface-applied peat manure was slow, but proceeded over a long period of time. After rain or irrigation, the peat manure layer on the soil surface retarded evaporation. Incorporation was less important for the fertilizer effect of peat manure than for pig slurry, but both manures were more effective when incorporated. Peat manure applications increase soil organic matter content and aggregate stability. Stubble mulch tillage hastens the effect in surface soil compared with ploughing. The apparent recovery of ammoniacal manure nitrogen in crop yield was higher with injection and incorporation than with surface applications. This was the case for leys as well as for spring cereals, even though ammonia losses from manures applied to cereals were relatively low with surface applications as well. The ammoniacal nitrogen of surface-applied slurry was obviously adsorbed by the very surface soil and remained mostly unavailable to plant roots in the dry soil. Supplementing manures with inorganic fertilizer nitrogen, which adds plant-available nitrogen to the soil at the start of growth, increased the overall recovery of applied nitrogen in crop yields.

Climate change and agriculture: theory and application of mitigation policies

Agriculture’s contribution to climate change is controversial as it is a significant source of greenhouse gases but also a sink of carbon. Hence its economic and technological potential to mitigate climate change have been argued to be noteworthy. However, social profitability of emission mitigation is a result from factors among emission reductions such as surface water quality impact or profit from production. Consequently, to value comprehensive results of agricultural climate emission mitigation practices, these co-effects to environment and economics should be taken into account. The objective of this thesis was to develop an integrated economic and ecological model to analyse the social welfare of crop cultivation in Finland on distinctive cultivation technologies, conventional tillage and conservation tillage (no-till). Further, we ask whether it would be privately or socially profitable to allocate some of barley cultivation for alternative land use, such as green set-aside or afforestation, when production costs, GHG’s and water quality impacts are taken into account. In the theoretical framework we depict the optimal input use and land allocation choices in terms of environmental impacts and profit from production and derive the optimal tax and payment policies for climate and water quality friendly land allocation. The empirical application of the model uses Finnish data about production cost and profit structure and environmental impacts. According to our results, given emission mitigation practices are not self-evidently beneficial for farmers or society. On the contrary, in some cases alternative land allocation could even reduce social welfare, profiting conventional crop cultivation. This is the case regarding mineral soils such as clay and silt soils. On organic agricultural soils, climate mitigation practices, in this case afforestation and green fallow give more promising results, decreasing climate emissions and nutrient runoff to water systems. No-till technology does not seem to profit climate mitigation although it does decrease other environmental impacts. Nevertheless, the data behind climate emission mitigation practices impact to production and climate is limited and partly contradictory. More specific experiment studies on interaction of emission mitigation practices and environment would be needed. Further study would be important. Particularly area specific production and environmental factors and also food security and safety and socio-economic impacts should be taken into account.