If you look at recent Statistics Canada's reports you will find that despite advancements in agriculture technology, farm fuel use is increasing. You would think the opposite. Why is fuel usage increasing? Are there not more fuel efficient tractors, trucks and combines out there today? And what about the trend to low disturbance seeding (LDS), a system that reduces total fuel consumption? These are questions that were asked by TransAlta Utilities in their efforts to determine if their support for LDS systems will help reduce C02 emissions by storing carbon in the soil. To help answer these questions, they commissioned a survey in cooperation with Prairie Agricultural Machinery Institute (PAMI) and the Saskatchewan Soil Conservation Association (SSCA) to determine the effect direct seeding has on overall fuel consumption.
The survey involved several producers, identified through SSCA contacts, who had information for both LDS systems and conventional farming systems over the period 1992-1997. The data analyzed included the amount of conventional and direct seeding acres, fallow acres, grain produced, fuel used and grain hauling distance. Three different seeding practices were investigated. These included LDS, high disturbance seeding (HDS), and a combination of the two where a producer used some of each practice in a given year. Data collected was then compared with average data obtained from Saskatchewan Agriculture and Food's Statistics Branch to determine the producer's total fuel cost.
Although the results of this survey did not provide enough data to show statistical significance, trends in fuel usage were obvious. Figure 1 shows the results of fuel cost per seeded acre. In all but one year, LDS had a much lower fuel cost per seeded acre than HDS. The year this trend was reversed could be due to that year having only one data point for the LDS system.
Sask Ag and Food data shows a higher fuel consumption rate per seeded acre than the data from this study. It is not clear why this is the case but the fact there are only 20-25% of the seeded acres in Saskatchewan under LDS may suggest the larger percentage of conventional seeding systems acres is outweighing the more fuel efficient LDS acreage.
Figure 2 shows the fuel cost per tonne of crop produced. Again the clear advantage is toward the LDS system. In fact the HDS system appears to have nearly double the fuel cost per tonne of crop produced of the LDS system. Survey researchers suggest that even with the limited data obtained in this study, there is a large enough difference to conclude that LDS, as practiced by the survey participants, can be used as a method to reduce fuel costs compared to HDS conventional seeding practices.
Aside from the above analysis, other parameters were surveyed that could affect fuel consumption. Figure 3 shows the breakdown of gasoline and diesel consumption for both seeding systems. It appears producers in the LDS system not only use less total fuel, but their proportion of gasoline consumption was also much lower as compared to producers using HDS systems. It is also important to note burning gasoline results in a larger proportion of green house gases released to the atmosphere than burning diesel fuel. The contributions from HDS systems to atmospheric green house gases are, therefore, even higher, notwithstanding the higher amounts of fuel burned in the HDS system.
Further investigation revealed that in this study the producers using HDS represented a smaller seed acreage per capita than those using LDS. Larger diesel trucks and tractors are likely being used more on the LDS farms, which would lower their relative gasoline consumption. Given this trend, the agricultural industry should exhibit lower gasoline consumption as farm size increases.
Another factor that undoubtedly contributes to higher farm fuel consumption is the distance to grain delivery points. This study found the average hauling distance from the farm to delivery point is increasing over time for all farmers. This alone could be a significant factor in the overall observed increase in fuel consumption over the time period studied.
The researchers concluded that LDS results in a lower fuel cost per seeded acre and per tonne of grain produced, compared to HDS. This is consistent with what many direct seeders have found after switching to the LDS system. Despite this fact, and a decrease in fallow acres, fuel consumption in Saskatchewan continues to rise. This could be largely due to the increased hauling distance, and it could also be due in part to the increased use of farm vehicles over longer distance for both farm and personal business. A further study should look at fuel cost, as well as other costs and savings due to direct seeding such as equipment cost, operating costs and labour. This type of study should be conducted on an ongoing basis rather than retroactively to improve the sample size.
In any case, the LDS system has shown, and continues to show efficiency when it comes to burning fossil fuels.
Anyone interested in further information on this report should contact the Prairie Agricultural Machinery Institute, P.O. Box 1900, Humboldt, SK S0K 2A0, Telephone: (306) 683-2555.
