Cotton Production in a Changing Environment

Cotton Production in a  Changing Environment HPACC 2014 Annual Meeting Bill Robertson March, 2014 Where Does My Food Come From? Field to Market: T...
1 downloads 0 Views 4MB Size
Cotton Production in a  Changing Environment HPACC 2014 Annual Meeting Bill Robertson March, 2014

Where Does My Food Come From?

Field to Market: The Sustainable Outcomes for Agriculture Alliance

Our working definition of sustainable agriculture

Sustainable agriculture will meet the needs of the present while improving the ability of future generations to meet their own needs by:  Increasing productivity to meet future nutritional and fiber needs while decreasing impacts on the environment  Improving human health through access to safe, nutritious food  Improving the economic well being of agricultural communities

11

Who are our members?

Cotton: 30 Years of Improved  Environmental Performance (1980 – 2011) 

Land Use

Soil Loss

30%

68%

Irrigation Water Energy Use Use

75%

31%

Field to Market: The Alliance for Sustainable Agriculture Dec. 2012 http://www.fieldtomarket.org/report/national‐2/PNT_NatReport_A27.pdf

GHG Emission

22%

Cotton LEADS™ is a program committed to responsibly produced cotton.

Cotton production in the United States continues to lead in the implementation of best management practices and continual improvement in key environmental indicators.

LAND USE

GREEHOUSE GASES

SOIL EROSION

ENERGY

IRRIGATION

Cotton is grown in many arid regions of the world, thriving and providing economic yields in environments not possible for many other crops. About 50% of the world’s cotton and only 36% of U.S. cotton receives some level of irrigation.

Pesticides, including herbicides, insecticides, nematicides and fungicides, help farmers around the world to stabilize yields in order to produce an abundant and affordable supply of food and fiber by preventing crop losses due to pests.

According to a survey of U.S. cotton growers in 2008, 44% of U.S. cotton farms had fields that required no foliar insecticides and nearly one-third of U.S. cotton acreage required absolutely no insecticide applications. In other words, only about 5.6 grams of total pesticides are applied per kilogram of U.S. cotton produced. Globally, from 1996 to 2006, there was a 23% reduction in insecticide active ingredients and the resultant environmental impact fell by 28%.

The energy required to produce cotton is actually less than the energy stored in the seed. Stored energy can be captured directly into biodiesel or other biofuels, or indirectly as feed for dairy cows and aquaculture. About 635 kilograms of seed are produced per hectare of cotton, which equates to over 75 liters of biodiesel per hectare – more than required to grow and gin the cotton crop.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions refer to any gas released into the atmosphere that prevents heat from the sun from escaping back into space. While the earth needs some GHGs to sustain life, higher concentrations can cause the earth’s climate to warm.

There is more carbon stored in cotton fiber and soil than emitted during production.

Cotton has a neutral greenhouse gas footprint that continues to improve over time.

From the field to the mill, Cotton LEADS™ is leading the way in traceable, transparent and efficient cotton production.

Tracking

and identification systems are in place throughout the cotton production supply chain.

Cotton produced in the United States

utilizes the USDA cotton classing program to identify every bale of U.S. cotton. Bales at the mill are identified by the Permanent Bale Identification

tag

which

provides

fiber

quality

and

tracking

information. Cotton can be tracked back to the field where it was produced.

Cotton LEADS™ is actively involved in benchmarking beyond the agriculture boundary. The Cotton Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) aims to provide a global comprehensive inventory of data relating to cotton production and textile manufacturing. The associated Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) utilizes global LCI data to present a comprehensive

cradle-to-grave

examination

of

representative

cotton products, specifically knit golf shirts and woven pants, and includes

garment

creation,

consumer

product

use

and

maintenance, transportation and product end-of-life. Available at www.cottonleads.org, the LCA is another way that Cotton LEADS™ is leading the way in sustainable cotton supply chains.

The Fieldprint calculator is a web based tool  developed by the 

Field to Market Coalition for  Sustainable Agriculture

Fieldprint calculator http://fieldtomarket.org 26

Field To Market Calculator START PAGE

Field Print

TAWC Cotton Fields • Hale and Floyd Counties • 6500 Acres from 111 Cotton Fields Representing 23 Sites  and 14 Producers in 2007 to 2011 • No‐till to Conventional Tillage  • Dryland and Irrigated • Subsurface Drip • LEPA • Furrow

Ranking of Resource Efficiencies 2009 Cotton TAWC Lint  Producer Yield  & Field Equivalent Number (r)*

C‐‐2 F‐‐6 C1‐‐1 O‐‐8 F‐‐7 R‐‐2 C1‐‐3 F‐‐8 N—2 B1—1 O—9 T—1 T—9 I—2 V—3 J—2 A1—3 K—1 B—1 K—3 D‐‐1

7 9 20 6 9 12 20 9 8 4 2 1 17 19 5 14 3 16 15 13 18

Conservation Efficiency (r)

Soil Carbon (r)

1 4 7 5 13 20 15 8 6 14 3 2 12 19 11 9 10 17 18 16 21

2 4 1 8 5 6 3 11 7 19 9 15 10 12 16 14 20 17 13 18 21

Irr Water Use  Efficiency (r)

Energy Use Efficiency (r)

GHG Emission Efficiency (r)

Overall Resource Efficiency (r)

1 3

5 9 2 4 8 3 1 10 11 6 16 20 13 7 18 14 19 12 15 17 21

5 10 2 4 9 3 1 11 14 6 16 19 12 7 17 15 20 8 18 13 21

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

19 3 2 3 9 6 15 12 8 7 11 13 10 16 14 17 18

* Rank among 21 cotton fields with 1  being the highest or most efficient and 21 being the lowest or least efficient

Ranking of Resource and Total Variable Cost Efficiencies 2009 Cotton TAWC Lint  Producer Yield  & Field Equivalent Number (r)*

C‐‐2 F‐‐6 C1‐‐1 O‐‐8 F‐‐7 R‐‐2 C1‐‐3 F‐‐8 N—2 B1—1 O—9 T—1 T—9 I—2 V—3 J—2 A1—3 K—1 B—1 K—3 D‐‐1

7 9 20 6 9 12 20 9 8 4 2 1 17 19 5 14 3 16 15 13 18

Conservation Efficiency (r)

Soil Carbon (r)

1 4 7 5 13 20 15 8 6 14 3 2 12 19 11 9 10 17 18 16 21

2 4 1 8 5 6 3 11 7 19 9 15 10 12 16 14 20 17 13 18 21

Irr Water Use  Efficiency (r)

Energy Use Efficiency (r)

GHG Emission Efficiency (r)

Overall Resource Efficiency (r)

Total  Variable Cost Efficiency (r)

1 3

5 9 2 4 8 3 1 10 11 6 16 20 13 7 18 14 19 12 15 17 21

5 10 2 4 9 3 1 11 14 6 16 19 12 7 17 15 20 8 18 13 21

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

1 3 11 17 4 2 9 5 12 7 8 6 15 16 19 18 10 13 20 14 21

19 3 2 3 9 6 15 12 8 7 11 13 10 16 14 17 18

* Rank among 21 cotton fields with 1  being the highest or most efficient and 21 being the lowest or least efficient

Three or More Years of Cotton (2007 – 2011) Efficiency Ratings ‐ Occurrence in top 25% TAWC Producer & Field Number K—1 K—2 K—3 N—2 N—3 O—8 O—9 R—2 S—10 S—9 B—1 V—3 B2—1 C—2 D—6 F—5 F—6 F—7 F—8 I‐‐2

n 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 4

Lint  Yield  Equivalent

Conservation Efficiency

Soil  Carbon

Irr Water Energy Use  Use Efficiency  Efficiency

GHG Emission Efficiency

Overall Resource Efficiency

1 1 1

1 2 2

1 3

1

1 2

3 2 2

4 2 3

3 2 3

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 1 1

1 2 2 1 1

1 1

1 1

4 2 1

2 2 2

2 1 1 2 1 1

2

1

2 1 1 2 1 2 1

Total  Variable  Cost Efficiency

3

3

3 3

2 3 2

1 1

1

1 2 2 1

Three or More Years of Cotton (2007 – 2011) Efficiency Ratings ‐ Occurrence in Top 50% TAWC Producer & Field Number K‐‐1 K‐‐2 K‐‐3 N‐‐2 N‐‐3 O‐‐8 O‐‐9 R‐‐2 S‐‐10 S‐‐9 B‐‐1 V‐‐3 B2‐‐1 C‐‐2 D‐‐6 F‐‐5 F‐‐6 F‐‐7 F‐‐8 I‐‐2

n 4 4 4 4 4 5 4 4 3 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 4

Lint  Yield  Equivalent

1 1 4 4 2

Conservation Efficiency

Soil  Carbon

1

1

2 1 4 4

2 1 3 4 3 2 3

2 2 1 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 3

1 3 2 4 3 1 3

1 3 3 3 3 3 1

Irr Water Energy Use  Use Efficiency  Efficiency 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 4 2 2 3 3 2 3 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3

GHG Emission Efficiency 2 1 1

Overall Resource Efficiency

Total  Variable  Cost Efficiency

4 3 3

4 3 3

1 1 3 2 3 4 3

2

1

1

2 2 1 3 1 3 2 2 3

1 1 2 2 3 3 2 3

2 2 2

1

3 3 4 3 1

Variable Rate N



92 acres



2011—1195 lbs/ac 2012—1140 lbs/ac



Variable Rate N N

P2O5

K2O

(lbs/ac)

(lbs/ac)

(lbs/ac)

Traditional

120

30

90

2011

104

0

60

2012

71

30

73

Variable Rate N—2012  Traditional

Variable Rate

This producer… Saved approximately…

425,000 lb CO2e

4.2 billion BTU

19 tons of N and 15 tons of P2O5

$60,000*

* Savings calculated solely from fertilizer cost

Cover Crops VR and NO cover crops

VR with cover crops

Tillage Systems Conventional tillage

No‐till

Fieldprint Calculator Scenario Analysis BEFORE

AFTER

Conservation measures reduce your Fieldprint

Questions/Contact Information • Field to Market Website (includes Fieldprint  Calculator and background information) – http://www.fieldtomarket.org

• National Cotton Council‐Technical Services • Cotton Incorporated‐Ag Research &  Environment  Div. 

41

THANK YOU

Suggest Documents