Soil Nitrogen and Carbon Management Project, 2002

Report produced by Iowa Departmment of Agriculture and Land Stewardship

Concepts and Rationale for Regional Nitrogen Rate Guidelines for Corn, April 2006

Nitrogen (N) is typically one of the largest corn fertilization expenses. Nitrogen application is critical because it signifi cantly improves corn yield in many crop rotations. When choosing N rates, producers need to carefully consider both achieving most profi table economic return and advancing environmental stewardship. In 2004, university agronomists from the Corn Belt states began discussions regarding N rate use for corn production. The reasons for the discussions centered on apparent differences in methods for determining N rates across states, misperceptions regarding N rate guidelines, and concerns about application rates as corn yields have climbed to historic levels. An outcome of those discussions was an effort with the objectives to: ▪ develop N rate guidelines that could be applicable on a regional basis and ▪ identify the most profi table fertilizer N rates for corn production across the Corn Belt. This publication provides an overview of corn N fertilization in regard to rate of application, investigates concepts for determining economic application rates, and describes a suggested regional approach for developing corn N rate guidelines directly from recent research data.

Nitrate Nitrogen in Iowa Rivers, 2001

Part of the Department of Natural Resources' Water Fact Sheet Series. This one is about Nitrate in Iowa's rivers and streams.

Greenhouse Gas and Nitrogen Fertilizer Scenarios for U.S. Agriculture and Global Biofuels, June 2011

This analysis uses the 2011 FAPRI-CARD (Food and Agricultural Policy Research Institute–Center for Agricultural and Rural Development) baseline to evaluate the impact of four alternative scenarios on U.S. and world agricultural markets, as well as on world fertilizer use and world agricultural greenhouse gas emissions. A key assumption in the 2011 baseline is that ethanol support policies disappear in 2012. The baseline also assumes that existing biofuel mandates remain in place and are binding. Two of the scenarios are adverse supply shocks, the first being a 10% increase in the price of nitrogen fertilizer in the United States, and the second, a reversion of cropland into forestland. The third scenario examines how lower energy prices would impact world agriculture. The fourth scenario reintroduces biofuel tax credits and duties. Given that the baseline excludes these policies, the fourth scenario is an attempt to understand the impact of these policies under the market conditions that prevail in early 2011. A key to understanding the results of this fourth scenario is that in the absence of tax credits and duties, the mandate drives biofuel use. Therefore, when the tax credits and duties are reintroduced, the impacts are relatively small. In general, the results show that the entire international commodity market system is remarkably robust with respect to policy changes in one country or in one sector. The policy implication is that domestic policy changes implemented by a large agricultural producer like the United States can have fairly significant impacts on the aggregate world commodity markets. A second point that emerges from the results is that the law of unintended consequences is at work in world agriculture. For example, a U.S. nitrogen tax that might presumably be motivated for environmental benefit results in an increase in world greenhouse gas emissions. A similar situation occurs in the afforestation scenario in which crop production shifts from high-yielding land in the United States to low-yielding land and probably native vegetation in the rest of the world, resulting in an unintended increase in global greenhouse gas emissions.