Fertilizer Usage

[seldomseen]

Apparently some of the ruling class think we should be cutting our fertilizer usage by 30 percent in an effort to slow down climate change.
I don’t know how they will enforce this idea?
More regulation no doubt.
Really don’t like where this might lead!

[WiltonRanch]

Price will ultimately determine the cut in use. They’ll tax the crap out of it in the name of the environment. Half and half tillage fallow. The skies will be black again. Fml

[Sodbuster]

Looking like we should be able to cut 30% of our normal this coming year without affecting yields assuming we get some timely rains next year.

[BreadWinner]

$950 per ton for 46-0-0, they won’t have worry because everyone will be cutting back at these prices.

[Guest]

$950 per ton for 46-0-0, they won’t have worry because everyone will be cutting back at these prices.

if you can even get ?

[furrowtickler]

Apparently some of the ruling class think we should be cutting our fertilizer usage by 30 percent in an effort to slow down climate change.
I don’t know how they will enforce this idea?
More regulation no doubt.
Really don’t like where this might lead!

Trudeau was spouting this last January
I brought it up but no one seemed to care then what was coming

[biglentil]

About 90 cents per actual lb of N for both 46 and 28.

[furrowtickler]

Also never disclosed from what I seen was 30% reduction from what ? Western Canadian Average for last year , last 3 years , 10 years ?? Local averages
The range is huge . We would already be at least 30% below most heavy users, so then what ?
Or just more b/s to appeal to the UN agenda from our circus clown of a PM ??
All I see is more virtue signalling climate cult b/s

[burnt]

It's the old "turn the heat up slowly to boil the frog" story.

This has been in the works for a looong time and slowly implemented through perfectly legitimate - and utterly useless - purveyors of the nihilist agenda - our farm orgs.

These ignorant buffoons have been totally co-opted by the globalist dark lords.

As I sat at the annual policy meeting of the farm org I was a part of, there seemed to be something discomfiting about the rollout of the 4Rs program.

Sure, it makes sense, seems innocuous and prudent - but what is the final goal?

I assure you that it isn't about what it says it is.

There certainly are abuses of the necessary resources for growing crops and they are the ones who invite the attention and directives from our critics. Easy targets once publicly exposed. But the resulting backlash affects every producer regardless of their practices.

Last spring I plowed up a 3 year old stand of alfalfa, worked it up and planted it into corn the next day. 2x2 banded 250 lbs of 19-19-19 and did a Nitrate test in June to see if it needed any additional N. The test came back showing 135 units of available N, which would support a 180 bu corn yield in normal circumstances.

It looks to be an absolute bin-buster of a crop, lots of the cobs sporting 22 rows of kernels, 36 - 38 kernels per row.

1 mile down the road, a neighbor runs a lot of cattle and spreads a heavy coat of manure on all his acres. In spite of that he just routinely applies 150 units on N on all his corn ground. No N tests, no credit to previous legumes or soy N fixation.

Is that being responsible? I do not understand the lack of economic concern, let alone the effect of excess nutrient leaching.

One thing is for certain - the goons who are pushing the destruction of modern agriculture will be the last ones to feel the effects of their misguided efforts. They do not care one iota about the suffering that will come with the fulfillment of their dreams.

[furrowtickler]

Unfortunately you are not wrong , you have taken ridicule for speaking out on this by the goons .... for one reason , your not wrong . This has been in play for a very long time .