Bright Green Blog

New tech: Jeff Moyer of The Rodale Institute explains the operation of the roller-crimper (red machinery) he designed for organic no-till farming. The roller-crimper knocks down a cover crop to prepare for planting. The blue equipment behind him is a no-till planter.

(Jared Flesher)

Photos (1 of 1)

New way to farm boosts climate, too

‘Organic no-till’ combines best of two methods and sequesters most carbon. But can it work consistently?

By Jared Flesher  |  Contributor of The Christian Science Monitor/ March 12, 2009 edition

Kutztown, Pa.

Some scientists say an ice age was prevented thousands of years ago by the dawn of human agriculture – deforestation and farming released enough greenhouse gases into the atmosphere to prevent another global cool down, the theory goes.

Now, millennia later, researchers hope new farming techniques will put some of that carbon back into the ground and help stem the rising tide of global warming.

No-till agriculture, in which farmers don’t plow their fields anymore, is one practice said to promote carbon sequestration in the soil. Organic farming is another. Researchers here at the nonprofit Rodale Institute are now developing a hybrid “organic no-till” farming system that they say could sponge up more carbon than any other way of growing food.

The claim: If organic no-till agriculture were used successfully on all of the earth’s 3.5 billion tillable acres, it would absorb and sequester more than half of all present-day CO2 emissions every year, according to Rodale Institute research director Paul Hepperly.

At the same time, the practice would also curb soil erosion and the dangers of chemical runoff.

“No-till organic is probably one of the best systems for helping to sequester carbon,” says John Reganold, a soil scientist who has studied sustainable agriculture at Washington State University at Pullman for 25 years. “What Rodale is doing is the best of both worlds.”

Jeff Moyer, farm director at The Rodale Institute, says his quest for organic no-till began as a fortuitous accident 18 years ago. As part of an agricultural experiment, researchers had planted a field with a cover crop called hairy vetch. One end of the field wasn’t part of the experiment, though, so they just drove over it with tractors, crushing down the cover crop in the process.

Some time later, after the field had been planted with corn, Mr. Moyer noticed something interesting was happening where the tractors had trampled everything: Corn plants were growing through the crushed vetch crop, which now looked like a mat of brown cardboard and was acting as a sort of mulch.

“Everybody stood there and looked at it and went, ‘Wow, you did organic no-till,’ ” says Mr. Moyer. “So we’ve spent the last 18 years trying to figure out a system that will allow us to replicate that accident over and over and over again.”

The paradigm shift represented by organic no-till is that it strives to eliminate the use of both herbicides and tillage. But for it to work effectively, the cover crop suppressing the growth of weeds must be knocked down in just the right way and at just the right time. This lets a farmer plant cash crops directly through the cover crop at the same time it’s being rolled down.

In 2002, after experimenting for more than a decade with existing farm equipment, Mr. Moyer custom-engineered a corkscrewed roller-crimper that does the knockdown job from the front end of a tractor. The first roller-crimper proto­type was built in a neighbor’s weld shop and now, seven years later, they are being sold commercially by an independent manufacturer. Dozens are being used across the country by agricultural researchers and early-adopter farmers.

Bill Mason, a farmer on Maryland’s Eastern Shore, is one such early adopter. His reason for the switch had nothing to do with carbon sequestration; he was drawn by another promise of organic no-till: better economics. Organic crops sell for more than conventionally raised ones, while no-till cuts down on tractor use, reducing a farmer’s fuel and labor costs.

In 2005, Mr. Mason purchased a 15-foot roller-crimper for $4,000 and decided to give it a try with a field of soybeans. He felt he was taking a gamble.

“When you go out and roll a 120-acre field down and pray that it’s going to work, it’s a good portion of your income,” he says. “You’re taking a little bit of risk there.”

Mr. Mason says his results for that first year were “excellent.” His organic soybean yield was as good as his best conventional yields had been, and he was able to reduce his pre-harvest trips across the field in a tractor from eight passes (plowing, harrowing, planting, and multiple rounds of rotary hoeing and cultivation) to just one. He figures he is saving about $50 per acre in fuel and machinery costs alone. He has been using organic no-till for three years now, and says he would recommend it to anybody, at least for soybeans.

Corn has been a different story. His results so far with this crop have been disappointing, plagued by insects and poor yields. Across the country, USDA-sponsored research into organic no-till has been conducted in Georgia, Iowa, Michigan, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, North Dakota, and California. Experimenting with different variables of climate, soil, and crop variety, researchers have reported results ranging from excellent to abject failure.

The Rodale Institute and others have found it’s only possible to no-till a field a few years in a row before more aggressive perennial weeds start to gain a foothold. Mr. Moyer has been tilling two or three times every five years at the Rodale farm. Still, that represents a reduction in tillage of 40 to 60 percent.

Research continues on perfecting organic no-till, which is still a work in progress.

The Rodale Institute made news in 2003 when it released research results from its Farming Systems Trial – the longest-running side-by side comparison of conventional and organic farming in the country – that showed its organic (tilled) cropland was sequestering 1,000 pounds of carbon per acre per year. The high number surprised soil scientists because it showed that organic farming – even though it relies on extensive tillage – was outperforming no-till farming in terms of storing carbon. Since then, additional studies by other soil researchers have arrived at the same conclusion.

Agricultural practices that promote carbon sequestration can be “stacked,” says Moyer, so the idea now is to combine them into one farming system for the best results. Rodale researchers say stacking no-till farming, organic farming, and composting has the potential to sequester 3,000 pounds of carbon per acre per year, ten times the amount typically achieved through no-till farming alone.

Lee Burras, a soil scientist at Iowa State University, agrees that agriculture can help fight global warming, but he is tempered in his view of how large a role it might play.

“Can it help mitigate? Yes,” he says. “Is it the long-term, major solution? No.”

Part of the reason organic and no-till farming are only temporary solutions, he says, is that the ability of soil to sponge up more and more carbon eventually runs out.

“My own work shows [that] the more beat-up [the soil] is to begin with, the better response you get subsequently with carbon sequestration,” he says. “But after 10 years, 20 years, maybe it’s 50 years, we’re going to plateau out.”

Another important question is how to get farmers to embrace new methods.

“Farmers are very conservative people by nature,” farm director Moyer says. “When you ask a farmer to adopt a new technology, they are literally risking the farm, their home, and their income on this new technology.”

The allure of reduced fuel costs and better prices for organic produce may not be enough. Mr. Hepperly, the Rodale Institute research director, says that for a switch-over to occur in this country, the government must enact a system that pays farmers to sequester carbon. Carbon trading is already being experimented with at the Chicago Climate Exchange and elsewhere. The Rodale Institute is advocating that such a trading system be enacted in the next farm bill in 2012.

“This will allow farmers to see a real economic motivation to resolving these core issues,” Hepperly says.

Mr. Burras concurs: “I strongly support the idea of green payments,” he says. “Any practice that results in better carbon sequestration results in better environmental quality across the board.”

How does organic no-till farming work?

One of the challenges of growing crops is controlling weeds, but different types of farmers come at the problem in different ways. “No-till” farmers use large amounts of chemical herbicides to kill weeds, but don’t plow the soil. “Organic” farmers plow and cultivate extensively – another way to manage weeds – but don’t use any herbicides. Although each method has its advantages, until recently it seemed they were incompatible: Organic farmers till often; “no-till” farmers use herbicides.

The key to organic no-till is that it relies instead on a third method of weed control: cover crops. Cover crops are planted between rotations of food crops and, besides holding soil in place and crowding out weeds, also serve to replenish soil nutrients.

For example, if an organic no-till farmer intends to plant corn in the spring, he might plant that field the previous autumn with a cover crop of hairy vetch. The hairy vetch will put nitrogen back into the soil (which is important, because corn requires a lot of nitrogen to grow) and also keep the ground covered through the winter.

In the spring, once the hairy vetch crop is in full bloom, the farmer will roll it down using a special piece of equipment called a roller-crimper attached to the front of a tractor. At the same time, a no-till planter attached to the back of the tractor will plant the corn crop.

When the cover crop dies, killed by the roller-crimper, it functions as a weed-suppressing mulch. If everything goes as planned, the corn will grow up through the mulch, while the weeds will be stifled.

Researchers point out that organic no-till is not necessarily an all-or-nothing proposition. No-till farmers can incorporate elements of it to reduce the amount of herbicide they use, and organic farmers can employ it to reduce their tillage.

The same concepts of organic no-till farming can be applied on a much smaller scale to home gardening, although the actual equipment and methods involved are different. Here’s a link to an organic gardening blog that describes how to do it.

( More stories )

Comments

1. David Hartman | 03.12.09

Do you know the phrase Weasel Words?
Some Scientists say…
The first two paragraphs are a wearying plug for Global Warming,
since everything must bow at that altar before going about a days work.
Third and Fourth paragraphs are a transition to why this article is allowed.

Will the Editor not approve a good article otherwise?

Must we say the rosary and light a candle before every productive act?

This article is about roll crimping no till farming,
which is a perfectly suitable topic in its own right.
It should not need justification to exist based on the greater world good.
Not everything we do need align with CO2,
it could be just good farming.

2. Ale Fernandez | 03.13.09

This is nothing new at all. It is a characteristic of many forms of agriculture, but western agriculture tends to be intensive and has long abandoned these techniques. It’s first resurgence was in the 70s and it is now known in agricultural and ecological circles as Permaculture. Look it up on wikipedia, or watch the BBC’s recent programme on it called “farm for the future” - available on google video. It has evolved from a simple way to do intensive localised earth-friendly agriculture into a complete design system for human settlement, and is the philosophy behind the grass roots “Transition Towns” movement, which is now spreading across the world.

3. James Shelton | 03.13.09

You mean some people are in favor of the greater world good? That’s terrible, that would be good for everyone in the world.

4. Peeko Sanchez | 03.13.09

Lol at James- the nerve of people, eh?

I have no doubt that most Americans could care less about our farmers, so pulling in the climate change angle likely made many more people read this article than would have otherwise. I personally had no idea about organic no-till and appreciated getting schooled on it.

I think anything that gets us to invent or re-invent methods to help us move away from factory farms is a good thing. If organic no-till, like other benign farming methods, offers a bonus of helping reduce excess carbon from the atmosphere- that’s a good thing, not a reason to complain about crazy lefties who care too much.

5. Robert Vincin | 03.13.09

I am an Australian working with PRC to reverse desert back to sustainable agriculture with dedicated CO2 sequestering C4 (photosynthesis pathway) vegetation. Your researchers must be congratulated but caution must apply when believing all vegetation sequesters CO2. Weeds often are C4 CO2 sequestering. Trees cotton most rice trees crops are C3 taking biomass carbon from soil and in time deserts follow.The current global efforts to address Climate change drought lack of water soil ad-hoc is a serious error. Water atmosphere soil vegetation are the only baseline assets all else but commodities. The global decline of bees and worms is a tell-tale as all farmers will agree with Albert Einstein No bees no food no man and he must change his priorities immediately if he is to survive. We will reverse 200milion hectares by 2012 and minimum of 25btomme CO2 back to sustained soil

6. ccpo | 03.15.09

I agree with an poster above, but the poster was partly wrong. What these people are calling no-till organic was created in its modern form over fifty years ago. The earliest form I can find is the very well known example of Masonobu *******, who wrote about this in two different books: The One Straw Revolution and The Natural Way of Farming, complete with clover cover crops as nitrogen fixers.

For the Rodale people to claim this is “new” is false. In fact, it strains credulity for an agricultural research institute to claim no knowledge of The ******* Method.

As stated above, *******’s methods have been integrated into permaculture practices in recent years, so Rodale’s claim is all the more incredulous.

Cheers

7. ccpo | 03.15.09

Sorry, just noticed one other thing. Mr. Mason’s trouble with corn come from monoculture farming. All pests have natural enemies either in predators or plants that repel them. Mr. Mason should look into what little beasties like to eat his corn pests and/or what plants repel them and co-plant them with the corn, either intertwined (good for the soil) or on the perimeter.

Perhaps this would help: https://www.bookshop.qld.gov.au/ProdView.aspx?popup=1&Product=1864239727

Cheers

8. Rob | 03.16.09

It’s really odd that you censored the author of “one straw revolution”’s name.

I understand he shares his name with a popular ********, but really, I mean, aren’t readers of the christian science monitor a little more advanced than that?

9. 3rd Heathen | 03.19.09

The field mentioned in the story may seem significant to many people. But for this to have any significant impact it needs to work on operations of more than 2000 acres. If you actually want to live by growing corn, you will probably need 5000 plus acres, with half in soybeans. The problem is that you need the ability to plant it within a few days. You only have a few weeks of a window before you start to see yeild reductions, and feild and weather conditions do not always cooperate.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

Leave a Comment

  By clicking "Submit Comment", you agree to our Terms of Service.

We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.

Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.

Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.

Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.