NUTRIENT TRACKING TOOL

Transcription

1 NUTRIENT TRACKING TOOL A Cooperative Project Between Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research (TIAER) USDA NRCS USDA ARS US EPA Funding support for this project was provided in part through a cooperative agreement between USDA-NRCS and the Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research (TIAER) through Conservation Innovation Grants program 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

2 Why NTT? NTT was built to: Facilitate water quality trading Assess various conservation practices Single national model with site specific soil, climate & calibration coefficients Transparent and rigorous using the National and local data basis Combines ease of use with rigorous science & oversight framework 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

3 How does NTT work? Uses Agricultural Policy Environmental extender (APEX) to determine nutrient, sediment losses, runoff, and crop production in agricultural and forest lands A web-based program that requires no software installation Required data for major portions of US are provided through National, local and pre-existing databases (e.g., weather, soils, major local and RUSLE2 management zone data) 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

4 Who can use NTT? NTT employs a user-friendly web-based interface to make the benefits of APEX directly accessible to farmers, crop consultants, government officials and the general public Anyone with internet access can use NTT, but the tool was designed with specific attention to the needs of the typical farmer Proprietary data input by farmers can be kept confidential 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

5 Practices simulated by NTT Simulates a wide variety of conservation practices (CPs), including most listed in the USDA field office technical guides Cultural CPs (e.g., nutrient management, tillage, irrigation, etc.) Structural CPs (e.g., forest buffers, filter strips, wetlands, terraces, tile drainage, grass waterways, lagoons, ponds, reservoir, etc.) 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

6 Possible applications for NTT NTT can be used as an assessment tool to analyze water quality and quantity impacts of CPs for Many conservation program evaluation and TMDL achievement evaluation NTT output can be used in conjunction for economic models to estimate cost-effectiveness of CPs Other programs, such as NutrientNet, to calculate nutrient credits in the trading platform 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

7 Current States Evaluating NTT Missouri Mississippi Oregon Washington California Idaho Ohio Chesapeake States (New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia (NutrienNet) 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

8 APEX Model 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

9 Components of APEX model Weather Hydrology Erosion (wind and water) Nutrients (N, P, and K) CO 2 Pesticides Crop growth Tillage Management Routing Reservoirs Groundwater Grazing Manure management 9

10 Example of CP evaluated by NTT Structural CPs Filter strips Stream channel stabilization Grass waterways Wetland, reservoir, and ponds Riparian forest Fencing Terracing Contour buffers Tile Systems Cultural CPs Nutrient management Tillage operation Irrigation and fertigation Grazing operation Manure management 10

11 NTT Input Data Sources 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

12 (1) WEATHER Includes 47 years ( ) of measured daily rainfall and min/max temperature Source: USDA-NRCS Climate Data Center (2) SOIL AND FIELD GEOMETRY Soil SURGO up to 10 layers & up to 9 major soils within a field Source: National Cooperative Soil Survey operated by the USDA-NRCS Soil Survey Data Mart site: ( 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

13 (3) Management Includes daily management operations for any crop rotations Sources: A. user input (including options for saving, editing, and uploading B. pre-existing Most common local cropping systems RUSLE management zone data 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

14 NTT Example Change of Agricultural Land to Forestry 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

15

16

17

18

19

20 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

21

22 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

23

24 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

25 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

26 Corn-soybean rotation with BMPs versus Forestry

27 Summary page: Corn-soy with BMPs versus Forestry

28 NO BMP WITH BMP

29 Future work on NTT Extending NTT capabilities for all regions of U.S. by developing the required databases Simulation of multiple fields within a farm Herbicides, pesticides, and CO 2 outputs Adoption of NTT for Water Quality Trading Programs in all States Modification of NTT for other land uses such as Forestry Completing the integration of FEM to estimate the costs/benefits of CPs 12/20/2012 A. Saleh

30 Main CPEC Screen Conservation Practices Economic Calculator (CPEC) The CPEC Program provides important information regarding the costs/benefits of conservation practice implementation to complement data on changes in nutrients, sediment, and crop yield as calculated by NTT. This economic information is essential for programs, such as trading or Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs), to better understand the associated cost/ benefits. CPEC is based on Farm Economic Model, which was developed by researchers at the Texas Institute for Applied Environmental Research (TIAER) at Tarleton State University. FEM has been used in numerous locations in US and other countries. For more information regarding FEM or CPEC please contact Dr. Edward Osei and Dr. Ali Saleh ENTER

31 An example list of scenarios (1 of 2) Scenario Scenario Description Manure Application (M) M1 Manure applied at the N rate and manure nutrient crediting M2 Manure applied at the high P rate and manure nutrient crediting M3 Manure applied at the low P rate and manure nutrient crediting M6 Incorporation of solid manure M7 Injection of liquid manure Fertilizer Application (F) F1 Elimination of fall crop removal fertilizer applications on all cropland F2 Reduced N application on all cropland F3 Reduced and split N application on all cropland Cropland tillage (c) C1 No-till on all cropland 31

32 List of scenarios (2 of 2) Soil Management (S) S1 Terraces on cropland with slopes greater than 2 percent S2 Contouring on cropland and pastureland with slopes greater than 2 percent S3 Contour buffer strips on cropland with slopes greater than 2 percent Ration Modifications (R) R1 Phytase-supplemented rations for swine farms Structural BMPs (B) B3 B5 Production System (P) P2 P3 Filter strips on manure application fields Enhancing and developing waterways for all cropland Hoop structures for all swine operations Hoop structures for open lot swine operations Illustrative Combinations of Individual Practices Maquoketa 1 No-till and reduced N rate on all cropland b Maquoketa 2 Contour buffer strips on cropland with slopes greater than 2 percent; reduced N on cropland b Maquoketa 3 Contour crop and pastureland with slopes greater than 2 percent; reduced N on cropland b Maquoketa 4 No-till on solid manure 32 fields and injection of liquid manure

33 Sediment losses: % change 20 0 B3 R1M6 P2 P3 M7 F1 M1 M3 F3 F2 M2-20 C1 S2-40 S3 B5-60 S Profit impact: $/acre 33

34 Nitrate losses: % change 20 C1 0 S1 S3 B5 B3 S2 P3 P2 M7 M6 R1 F1-20 F2-40 M1 M2 M3 F Profit impact: $/acre 34

35 Total N losses: % change 20 0 S1 S3 C1 B3 S2 B5 P3 P2 M7 M6 R1 F M1 M2 M3 F3 F Profit impact: $/acre 35

36 Total P losses: % change 0 B3 P3 R1 M6 P2 M7-20 B5 C1 S2 M1 M2 M3 F3 F1 F2 S3-40 S Profit impact: $/acre 36

37 Questions and feedback Thanks 12/20/2012 A. Saleh