Time to shine

Abby Bauer Managing Editor

Anyone paying the bills to fertilize fields, heat a home, or both knows that those expenses have been draining more from the bank account as of late. Sky-high prices from 2021 bled into the new year, leaving 2022 filled with uncertainty as to where these values will go.

Anhydrous ammonia and natural gas are closely linked, because natural gas is a key element in the process that converts nitrogen to ammonia in a reaction with hydrogen to create this nitrogen fertilizer source. So, when natural gas prices nearly doubled between January and October of last year, it didn’t take long for anhydrous ammonia to follow suit. The year started out with a price tag of $450 per ton and exploded to quotes as high as $1,350 per ton for anhydrous ammonia later in 2021.

No doubt, the price of these two inputs impacts other farm choices and expenses. According to Michigan State University assistant professor Matthew Gammans, “Natural gas drives what happens with ammonia price, which drives decisions around corn planting in the spring, which ultimately affects the corn price. The three are very tightly linked.”

Enter manure. Fortunately, when fertilizer prices are high, livestock producers have another tool in their toolbox that most crop farmers don’t have readily available. Manure has been used for centuries to nourish fields, but at a time when fertilizer prices are through the roof, it is really an opportunity for manure to shine.

Improved manure management over the past few decades has reaped even greater rewards from this abundant by-product that livestock farmers must deal with anyway. Even though many nutrient management practices are established due to regulations that have been put into place to protect water quality, farmers who want to take true advantage of the power of manure would do these things regardless. During an interview with Jason Demaray, general manager of support services at Reicks View Farms featured on page 12, he stated this very clearly.

“We are regulated, but it’s the value of the manure that really drives more of that than the regulations,” Demaray shared about their nutrient management. “It’s not just a cost of disposal for us; it’s really a co-product. It’s a very valuable byproduct of producing pigs that we can fully utilize. The economics drive more decisions than regulations.”

Years like this make manure and soil testing even more imperative. If you know the nutrient content of the manure you have at your disposal, it can be best put to use. As for soil, tests may reveal a nice stockpile of phosphorus or potassium in some of your fields.

Perhaps this is an opportunity to reduce commercial fertilizer use this year. However, don’t shortchange fields that would benefit from application, as the immediate cost savings could result in lost profits at harvest. And, if you cut back on applications this year and utilize more of the nutrients banked in the soil, don’t forget to replenish those inventories down the road.

Aside from being an economic benefit, using manure to its fullest potential is also a compelling part of agriculture’s sustainability story. If we can recycle a waste product by using it as fertilizer to grow crops that feed animals, while reducing the need for commercially-made products, that is about as sustainable as it gets.

Whether we like it or not, the goal of reducing global greenhouse gas emissions is here to stay. From television news reports to presentations at conference to articles in magazines like this one, it will remain a topic of conversation. More and more, it feels like a light is getting shined onto agriculture. Rather than seeing that light as a microscope evaluating our every move, perhaps we can make this agriculture’s time to shine in the world’s sustainability efforts.

Until next time,

Let us know your thoughts. Write Managing Editor Abby Bauer, 28 Milwaukee Ave. West, P.O. Box 801, Fort Atkinson, WI 53538; call: 920-563-5551; or email: abauer@jofnm.com.

NORTH CAROLINA

The Environmental Protection Agency will be investigating the North Carolina legislature’s decision to fast track a general permitting process allowing four hog farms to generate biogas. The Southern Environmental Law Center filed a complaint that “degraded groundwater, surface water, and air quality” would disproportionately harm the mostly black and Latino residents that live in this area, violating Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and state environmental laws.

The $500 million biogas plan is a joint venture between Smithfield Foods Inc. and Dominion Energy Inc. Last July, the legislature passed the Farm Act of 2021, requiring the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) to create an expedited permitting process that would enable existing hog farms to obtain a general permit to join the program.

Opponents worry that the general permit will treat all farms the same using similar monitoring requirements regardless of size and production style. The DEQ will hold several public meetings to get feedback from the community. The general permit is supposed to be finalized by July.

MISSOURI

Two counties in Missouri filed an appeal to the state’s Supreme Court last month to overturn a law passed in 2019 that prohibits county commissioners from setting policies that are “inconsistent with or more stringent than” the state’s rules for concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). The commissioners for these two counties and several Missouri residents previously sued the state, saying the law and its 2021 update violated the state’s constitution, but they lost their case at the trial court level.

ILLINOIS

Late last month, State Senator Ram Villivalam (D-Chicago) filed a senate bill to extend the Partners for Conservation Fund, a program run through the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, through 2032. The funding for the program would rise from $10 million to more than $25 million over the next 10 years.

Illinois is one of 11 states in the Mississippi River basin that have pledged to develop strategies to reduce the amount of nutrients leaving their borders. The state set a goal to reduce nitrates and nitrogen runoff by 15% and phosphorus runoff by 25% before 2025. However, the most recent update from 2020 showed that nitrate/nitrogen loss rose by 13% and phosphorus loss grew by 35% compared to the baseline period of 1980 to 1996.

MANURE MINUTE

REALIZE THE VALUE OF FEEDLOT MANURE

When discussing feedlot profitability, producers may often talk about the cost of gain or break-even costs. If manure enters the discussion, it is often referred to as an expense, but extension feedlot specialist Warren Rusche reminded cattle feeders to not underestimate the value of manure collected from feedlots in a recent South Dakota State University article.

The value of manure varies depending on the type of facility, as shown in the figure. Using $750 per ton for urea, $800 per ton for diammonium phosphate (DAP), and $700 per ton for potash, a 999-head beef facility would generate $52,000 worth of crop nutrients in an open yard, $110,000 in a bedded-pack barn, and $135,000 in a slatted floor barn. These numbers assume that cattle are housed in the facility year-round and that 50% of the manure nitrogen is available for crop use. The manure nutrient value would be even higher at current fertilizer price levels.

Rusche recommended taking a strategic approach to manure application to capture its value. This includes collecting representative samples and submitting them for accurate laboratory analysis, prioritizing fields based on soil fertility, and taking steps to reduce nutrient losses, such as knifing in liquid manure or incorporating solid manure.

“If cattle feeders are going to capitalize on this resource, they need to make sure they do not treat manure, well . . . like manure,” he wrote. ■

Nutrient value of manure in various feedlot facilities

Manure value, $/head

160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0  Nitrogen  Phosphorus  Potassium

Assumptions: Urea = $750/T DAP = $800/T Potash = $700/T 50% of N available

Open yard Bedded pack Slatted floor