Tải bản đầy đủ - 0 (trang)
V. Energy Requirements for Various Tillage–Planting Systems

V. Energy Requirements for Various Tillage–Planting Systems

Tải bản đầy đủ - 0trang

TABLE XI1

Energy and Diesel Fuel Requirementsa for Various Tillage and Planting Operations



Soil draft classification



Low

Operation



1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.



Shredding stalks

Moldboard plowing, 8” deep

Chisel plowing, 8“ average depth

Disking stalks

Disking tilled ground

Ridge (furrow mulch)

Field cultivating tilled ground

Planting, conventional

Wheel-track planting

Field cultivate-planter combination

Till-planting

Strip rotary till-planter combination

No-till (fluted coulter) planting

Rotary hoeing

Row-crop cultivating, conventional

Row-crop cultivating, till-planted



Medium



High



PTO kWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



PTOk Wh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



1/ha

(gal/A)



PTOkWH/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



(gal/A)



18.5 (10)

33.2 (18)

22.2 (12)

10.2 (5.5)

11.1 (6)

33.2 (18)

11.4 (6.2)

9.2 (5)

11.4 (6.2)

20.7 (11.2)

9.2 (5)

12.9 (7)

9.6 (5.2)

3.1 (2)

4.6 (2.5)

6.1 (3.3)



7.5 (0.8)

13.1 (1.4)

8.9 (0.95)

4.2 (0.45)

4.7 (0.5)

13.1 (1.4)

4.7 (0.5)

3.7 (0.4)

4.7 (0.5)

8.4 (0.9)

3.7 (0.4)

5.1 (0.55)

4.2 (0.45)

1.4 (0.15)

1.9 (0.2)

2.3 (0.25)



18.5 (10)

53.5 (29)

35.1 (19)

9.2 (5)

12.9 (7)

40.6 (22)

23.1 (12.5)

11.4 (6.2)

14.8 (8)

24.9 (13.5)

11.4 (6.2)

16.6 ( 9 )

12.0 (6.5)

5.5 (3)

5.9 (3.2)

7.9 (4.3)



7.5 (0.8)

21.5 (2.3)

14.0 (1.5)

3.7 (0.4)

5.1 (0.55)

16.4 (1.75)

9.4 (1.0)

4.7 (0.5)

6.1 (0.65)

10.3 (1.1)

4.7 (0.5)

6.6 (0.7)

4.7 (0.5)

2.3 (0.25)

2.5 (0.27)

3.3 (0.35)



18.5 (10)

73.8 (40)

48.0 (26)

9.2 (5)

14.8 (8)

48.0 (26)

35.1 (19)

13.8 (7.5)

22.2 (12)

31.4 (17)

15.2 (8.2)

23.1 (12.5)

15.7 (8.5)

7.4 (4)

7.9 (4.3)

10.5 (5.7)



7.5 (0.8)

30.0 (3.2)

20.0 (2.1)

3.7 (0.4)

6.1 (0.65)

19.7 (2.1)

14.0 (1.5)

5.6 (0.6)

8.9 (0.95)

13.1 (1.4)

6.1 (0.65)

9.4 (1.0)

6.6 (0.7)

2.8 (0.3)

3.3 (.35)

4.2 (0.45)



~~~~



~



~



~~~



‘Tractor fuel consumption was taken as 2.46 kWh/l (12.5 PTO hphr per gallon).



l/ha



YIELDS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR CORN AND SOYBEANS



171



The estimates for the various planting methods are based primarily on measurements made by the authors in 1970 (Richey et d.,1973). Engine power was

measured by setting the diesel tractor throttle for the same no-load rpm before

all tests and then measuring fuel consumption and time for a measured distance

during the operation. The tractor was then calibrated with varying loads on an

electric PTO (power take-off) dynamometer, using the same no-load rpm setting,

to obtain a curve of PTO power versus fuel rate. This along with ground speed

allowed PTO kWh/ha (PTO hphr per acre) t o be calculated.



B. VARIOUS TILLAGE-PLANTING SYSTEMS IN

LOW-, MEDIUM-, AND HIGH-DRAFT SOILS



Estimates of energy and diesel fuel requirements for the high-energy,

moderate-energy, and low-energy tillage-planting systems described previously

are shown in Table XIII, Table XIV, and Table XV, respectively.

The field operations are indicated by the identification number assigned in

Table XI1 and total €TO kWh/ha (PTO hphr/A) and liters per hectare (gallons

per acre) of diesel fuel are shown.

Herbicides are listed with their energy requirements in diesel fuel equivalent,

based on an average of 66.11 kWh/kg (25,800 kcal/lb) (Gunkel et al., 1976) of

active ingredient with its carrier. The energy content of diesel fuel is taken as

11.35 kWh/liter (36,958 kcal/gal) (Wittmus and Lane, 1973) giving 5.82 liters

diesel fuel equivalent for 1 kg (0.7 gal/lb) of active herbicidal material and its

carrier. These are added to the figures for field operations to obtain the total

cultural energy requirement in F'TO kWh/ha (PTO hphr/A) and liters/ha (gallons/A).

Variations in operations can be readily evaluated by using the information in

Table XII.

Total cultural energy requirements in diesel fuel equivalent for each tillageplanting system and on low-, medium-, and high-draft soils are summarized in

Table XVI for corn and in Table XVII for soybeans. Corn is considered to follow

corn and soybeans are also considered to follow corn.



C. CORN TILLAGE SAVINGS



Moldboard plowing with wheel-track planting saves as much energy as no-till in

low- and medium-draft soils, due to the elimination of secondary tillage and the

use of banded herbicide instead of broadcast. It requires, however, much greater

plowing capacity to keep ahead of planting, with consequent high fixed cost for

the additional equipment investment.



TABLE XI11

Energy and Diesel Fuel Requirementsa for High-Energy Tillage-Planting Systems



Soil draft classification



w

4

2

.t



Low

Herbicide active ingredient

Tillageplanting system*



W h a (WA)



PTOkWhha

(PTO hphr/A)



Medium

l/ha

(gal/A)



PTO kWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



High

l/ha

(gal/A)



PTOkWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



(57.4)



42.8 (4.57)



134 (72.8)



54.6 (5.82)



89.0 (48.4)



7.9 (0.84)

13.1 (1.4)

63.8 (6.81)

36.4 (3.89)



121 (65.6)



10.5 (1.12)

13.1 (1.4)

78.2 (8.34)

49.1 (5.25)



~



Corn

Moldboard plow. Operations

4, 2, 5, 5, 8, 15

Atrazine

Lasso

Total

Moldboard plow, wheel track

plant. Operations

4, 2,9,15, 15

Atrazine (band)

Lasso

Total



79.4 (43)

1.12, 1.35, 1.79, (1, 1.2, 1.6)

2.24 (2.0)

64.0 (34.7)



0.38, 0.45, 0.61 (0.34, 0.4, 0.54)

0.53 (0.4)



32.3 (3.44)

6.6

13.1

52.0

25.7



(0.7)

(1.4)

(5.54)

(2.75)



2.2 (0.24)

4.4 (0.47)

32.3 (3.50)



106



2.6 (0.28)

4.4 (0.47)

43.4 (4.64)



3.6 (0.38)

4.4 (0.47)

57.1 (6.1)



Chisel plow. Operations

4 , 3 , 5, 5, 8, 15

Atrazine

Lasso

Total



r

-1



Soybeans

Moldboard plow. Operations

4 , 2 , 5 , 5 , 8, 14, 15, 15

Lorox

Lasso

Total

Chisel plow. Operations

4 , 3 , 5 , 5 , 8 , 14, 15, 15

Lorox

Lasso

Total



72.8 (39.4)

1.4, 1.68, 1.79 (1.25, 1.5, 1.6)

2.24 (2.0)



95.1 (51.5)



8.2 (0.88)

13.1 (1.4)

50.9 (5.43)

87.7 (47.5)



35.7 (3.8)



81.1 (43.9)



5.0 (0.53)

13.1 (1.4)

53.8 (5.73)

33.0 (3.51)



0.84, 1.4, 1.68 (0.75, 1.25, 1.5)

2.24 (2.0)



0.84, 1.4, 1.68 (0.75, 1.25, 1.5)

2.24 (2.0)



29.6 (3.15)



5.0 (0.53)

13.1 (1.4)

51.1 (5.44)



38.9 (4.14)



119.5 (64.7)



10.5 (1.12)

13.1 (1.5)

72.2 (7.70)



9.8 (1.05)

13.1 (1.4)

61.8 (6.59)

117.2 (63.5)



48.0 (5.12)



105.5 (57.2)



8.2 (0.88)

13.1 (1.4)

69.3 (7.4)

43.3 (4.61)

8.2 (0.88)

13.1 (1.4)

64.6 (6.89)



48.6 (5.18)



149.6 (81.0)



60.8 (6.48)



134.8 (73.0)



9.8 (1.05)

13.1 (1.4)

83.7 (8.93)

54.8 (5.84)

9.8 (1.05)

13.1 (1.4)

77.7 (8.29)



‘Diesel fuel equivalent for herbicides based on 66.1 1 kWh/kg (25,800 kcal/lb) of active ingredient plus its carrier and with diesel fuel at 11.35 kWh/l

(36,958 kcal/gal), giving 5.82 l/kg (0.7 gal/lb).

bOperations are those identified in Table XII. Herbicide rates are current Purdue recommendations.



TABLE X N

Energy and Diesel Fuel Requirements' for Moderate-Energy Tillage-Planting Systems



Soil draft classification

Herbicide active ingredient

Tillageplanting systemb



c.

4

P



Corn

Disk. Operations

4 , 5 , 5 , 8, 15, 15

Atrazine

Lasso

Total

Ridge (furrow mulch)

Operations, 6, 15, 8, 15

Atrazine

Lasso

Total



k s F a Ob/A)



Low



ash



Medium



~



~



~



PTOkWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



]/ha

(gal/A)



PTOkWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



PTOkWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



]/ha

(gal/A)



50.8 (27.5)



20.7 (2.25)



58.3 (31.6)



24.1 (2.54)



68.5 (37.1)



27.8 (3.0)



51.7 (28)



8.8 (0.94)

14.8 (1.58)

44.3 (4.77)

21.0 (2.2)



63.9 (34.6)



10.5 (1.12)

14.8 (1.58)

49.4 (5.24)

26.4 (2.79)



77.7 (42.1)



10.5 (1.12)

14.8 (1.58)

53.1 (5.7)

31.6 (3.4)



1.5, 1.79, 1.79 (1.34, 1.6, 1.6)

2.52 (2.25)



1.5, 1.79, 1.79 (1.34, 1.6, 1.6)

2.52 (2.25)



10.5 (1.12)

14.8 (1.58)

51.7 (5.49)



8.8 (0.94)

14.8 (1.58)

44.6 (4.72)



10.5 (1.12)

14.8 (1.58)

56.9 (6.1)



Soy beans

Disk. Operations

5, 5, 8, 14, 15, 15

Lorox



Lasso

Total

Ridge (furrow mulch)

Operations 6, 15, 8, 15, 15

Lorox

Lasso

Total



44.3 (24)



18.0 (1.95)



56.3 (30.5)



6.5 (0.7)

14.8 (1.58)

39.3 (4.23)

22.9 (2.4)



1.12, 1.4, 1.68 (1.0, 1.25. 1.5.)

2.52 (2.25)



1.12, 1.4, 1.68 (1.0, 1.25, 1.5)

2.52 (2.25)



6.5 (0.7)

14.8 (1.58)

44.2 (4.68)



54.6 (29.6)



22.6 (2.39)



69.8 (37.8)



8.2 (0.88)

14.8 (1.58)

45.6 (4.85)

29.0 (3.06)

8.2 (0.88)

14.8 (1.58)

52.0 (5.52)



66.6 (36.1)



27.1 (2.9)



85.7 (46.4)



9.8

14.8

51.7

34.8



(1.05)

(1.58)

(5.53)

(3.71)



9.8 (1.05)

14.8 (1.58)

59.4 (6.34)



'Diesel fuel equivalent for herbicides based on 66.11 kWh/kg (25,800 kcal/lb) of active ingredient plus its carrier and with diesel fuel at 11.35

kWh/l (36,958 kcal/gal), giving 5.82 l/kg (0.7 gal/lb).

boperatiom are those identified in Table XII. Herbicide rates are current Purdue recommendations.



TABLE XV

Energy and Diesel Fuel Requirementsa for Low-Energy Tillageplanting Systems



Soil draft classification

Herbicide active ingredient

Tillageplanting systemb



c.

4

VI



Corn

Till-plant. Operations

1, 11, 16

Atrazine

Lasso

Total

No-till Coulter

Operations 1, 13

Atrazine



Lasso

Paraquat

Total

Rotary-20 cm Strip

Operation 12

Atrazine

Lasso

Paraquat

Total



kg/ha (WA)



Low



High

~



PTO kWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



PTO kWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



PTOkWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



33.8 (18.3)



13.7 (1.45)



37.8 (20.5)



15.4 (1.65)



44.1 (23.9)



17.9 (1.0)



28.1 (15.2)



8.8 (0.94)

14.8 (1.58)

37.3 (3.97)

11.4 (1.25)



30.5 (16.5)



10.5 (1.12)

14.8 (1.58)

40.7 (4.35)

12.4 (1.3)



34.2 (18.5)



10.5 (1.12)

14.8 (1.58)

43.2 (4.60)

13.9 (1.5)



12.9 (7.0)



10.5 (1.12)

16.4 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

41.6 (4.47)

5.2 (0.55)



16.6 (9.0)



10.5

16.4

3.3

42.6

6.8



23.1 (12.5)



10.5 (1.12)

16.4 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

44.2 (4.72)

9.4 (1.0)



1.5, 1.79, 1.79 (1.34, 1.6, 1.6)

2.52 (2.25)



1.79 (1.6)

2.8 (2.5)

0.56 (0.5)



1.79 (1.6)

2.8 (2.5)

0.56 (0.5)



Medium

________



~



10.5

16.4

3.3

35.4



(1.12)

(1.75)

(0.35)

(3.77)



(1.12)

(1.75)

(0.35)

(4.52)

(0.7)



10.5 (1.12)

16.4 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

37.0 (3.92)



10.5 (1.12)

16.4 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

39.6 (4.22)



(continued)



TABLE XV (continued)

Soil draft classification

Herbicide active ingredient

Tillageplanting systemb



k g b (WA)



Soybeans

No-till Coulter

Operations 1, 13



Lorox

Lasso

Paraquat

Total

Rotary-20 cm Strip

Operation 12

Lorox

Lasso

Paraquat

Total



Low



High



PTOkWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



PTOkWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



PTOkWh/ha

(PTO hphr/A)



l/ha

(gal/A)



28.1 (15.2)



11.4 (1.25)



30.5 (16.5)



12.4 (1.3)



34.2 (18.5)



13.9 (1.5)



12.9 (7.0)



6.5 (0.7)

16.4 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

37.6 (4.05)

5.2 (0.55)



16.6 (9.0)



8.2

16.4

3.3

40.3

6.8



23.1 (12.5)



9.8 (1.05)

16.5 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

43.4 (4.65)

9.4 (1.0)



1.12, 1.4, 1.68 (1.0, 1.25, 1.5)

2.8 (2.5)

0.56 (0.5)



1.12, 1.4, 1.68 (1.0, 1.25, 1.5)

2.8 (2.5)

0.56 (0.5)



Medium



6.5 (0.7)

16.4 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

31.4 (3.35)



(0.88)

(1.75)

(0.35)

(4.28)

(0.7)



8.2 (0.88)

16.4 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

34.8 (3.68)



9.8 (1.05)

16.4 (1.75)

3.3 (0.35)

38.9 (4.15)



aDiesel fuel equivalent for herbicides based on 66.1 1 kWh/kg (25,800 kcal/lb) of active ingredient plus its carrier and with diesel fuel at 11.35 kWh/l

(36,958 kcal/gal), giving 5.82 l/kg (0.7 gal/lb).

bOperations are those identified in Table XII. Herbicide rates are current Purdue recommendations.



177



YIELDS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR CORN AND SOYBEANS

TABLE XVI

Total Energy for Corn Tillage, Planting, and Weed Control in Diesel

Fuel Equivalent, l/ha (gal/A)



Soil draft classification

Tillage-planting system



Low



Medium



High



Moldboard plow-conventional

Moldboard plow-wheel track plant

Chisel plow-conventional

Disk-conventional

Ridge (furrow-mulch)

Till-plant

No-till coulter

Rotary strip



52 (5.54)

32.3 (3.46)

50.9 (5.43)

44.3 (4.77)

44.6 (4.72)

37.3 (3.97)

41.6 (4.47)

35.4 (3.77)



63.6 (6.79)

43 (4.6)

61.6 (6.57)

49 (5.2)

49.6 (5.27)

40.7 (4.35)

42.6 (4.52)

37.0 (3.92)



78.2 (8.34)

57.1 (6.1)

72.2 (7.70)

53.1 (5.7)

55.2 (5.92)

43.2 (4.6)

44.2 (4.72)

39.6 (4.22)



Till-planting requires less energy than no-till coulter planting, primarily due to

lower herbicide requirements because of better inherent weed control than no-till.

Erosion protection is not as good because of the bare depressed row area after

planting.

Chiseling with conventional secondary tillage saves little energy over plowing

with conventional tillage, showing a maximum of 6 l/ha (0.65 gal/A) saving in

heavy-draft soils.

Disking and furrow-mulch ridging are quite similar in energy requirements.

Savings compared to plowing are 7.6 l/ha (0.8 gal/A) for low-draft soils, 14.3

l/ha (1.55 gal/A) for medium-draft soils, and 24.3 l/ha (2.55 gal/A) for highdraft soils.

Rotary strip tillage requires less energy than no-till because no stalk shredding

is required. A rotary tiller is needed, however, in addition to a planter.

No-till saves 10.4 I/ha (1.1 gal/A) over plowing and conventional tillage in

low-draft soils, 21 l/ha (2.25 gal/A) in medium-draft soils, and 34.2 l/ha (3.65

TABLE XVII

Total Energy for Soybean Tillage, Planting, and Weed Control in Diesel

Fuel Equivalent, I/ha (gal/A)

Soil draft classification

Tillage-planting system

Moldboard plow-conventional

Chisel plow-conventional

Disk-conventional

Ridge (furrow-mulch)

No-till coulter

Rotary strip



Low



Medium



High



53.8 (5.73)

51.1 (5.44)

39.3 (4.23)

44.2 (4.68)

30.1 (3.25)

31.4 (3.35)



68.9 (7.36)

64.2 (6.85)

45.2 (4.81)

51.4 (5.46)

32.9 (3.48)

34.8 (3.68)



83.7 (8.93)

77.7 (8.29)

51.7 (5.53)

59.4 (6.34)

35.9 (3.85)

38.9 (4.15)



178



C. B. RICHEY ET AL.



gal/A) in high-draft soils. Unfortunately, no-till often has serious yield penalties

in heavy soils although yields are often equal to conventional tillage on light

soils, where energy savings are moderate.



D. SOYBEAN TILLAGE SAVINGS



Rotary hoeing and an extra cultivation are added for soybeans but herbicide

energy is usually slightly less as compared to that for corn. The figures in Table

XVI and XVII indicate that soybeans require about 4.7 l/ha (0.5 gal/A) more

energy than corn with high-energy tillage, slightly less with moderate-energy

tillage and about 9.4 l/ha (1 gal/A) less with low-energy tillage.

No-till shows 23.4 l/ha (2.5 gal/A) saving over plowing in low draft soil, 36.5

l/ha (3.9 gal/A) saving in medium draft soil, and 48.2 l/ha (5.15 gal/A) saving in

heavy-draft soil. No-till has had little acceptance in soybeans, however, because

of the weed control problem, except for double-cropping after wheat where

moisture conservation is paramount.

Chiseling saves 4.7-1 1.2 l/ha (0.5-1.2 gal/A) compared with plowing while

ridging or disking saves 7.0-18.2 l/ha (0.75-1.95 gal/A).

Chiseling is quite popular for corn or soybeans following soybeans since the

ground is loose and residue is not troublesome.

VI. Projecting Energy Savings with Reduced Tillage



As is apparent from the comparisons in Tables XVI and XVII, the maximum

possible energy saving is equivalent to less than 42 l/ha ( 5 gal/A). At present

prices this is equivalent to less than 25 kg/ha (1 bu/A) of corn. This is not a compelling economic incentive, particularly in cases where there is a substantial

possibility of a yield reduction with reduced tillage.

If, however, the price of fuel rises substantially relative to the price of corn, or

more important, if fuel availability is reduced, all means of saving fuel must be

considered.

It has been estimated that, of Indiana’s 2,428,000-ha (6,000,000-A) 1976 corn

crop, approximately 971,000 ha (2,400,000 A) could have used lowenergy

tillage without reduced grain yields if pests were controlled (Griffith er al.,

1976). It has also been assumed that the remaining hectarage (acreage) could

adapt to medium-energy tillage such as disking or ridging in place of plowing and

chiseling. On the basis of these estimates, possible Indiana energy saving has been

projected as shown in Table XVIII. The projected saving averages about 9.1 l/ha

(1 gal/A) for corn.

Similar savings would appear to be possible for soybeans except for the

problem of weed control. New herbicides may eliminate the need for cultivating



TABLE XVIII

Possible Energy Savings in Indiana by Reduced Tillage for Corn, 2,428,170 ha (6,000,000 A) in 1976

Hectares (acres)

Soil and climate adapted to low-energy tillage

Herbicide-resistant perennial weeds

Now using low-energy tillage

Possible change to low-energy tillage

Possible savings, assuming 50% medium-draft and 50% lowdraft soils, in changing from

plow and chisel tillage, @ 14 l/ha (1.5 gal/A)

Remainder adapted to moderate-energy tillage

Herbicide-resistant perennial weeds

Now using medium-energy tillage

Possible change from high-energy tillage to moderate-energy tillage

Possible savings, assuming 50% high-draft and 50% medium-draft soils, in changing from

plow and chisel tillage @ 16.4 l/ha (1.75 gal/A)

Possible total annual energy saving



Energy savings ](gal)



971,270 (2,400,000)

72,845 (180,000)

194,255 (480,000)

704,170 (1,740,000)

9,858,380 (2,610,000)

1,456,900 (3,600,000)

291,380 (720,000)

291,380 (720,000)

874,140 (2,160,000)

14,335,900 (3,780,000)

24:194,280 (6,390,000)



Tài liệu bạn tìm kiếm đã sẵn sàng tải về

V. Energy Requirements for Various Tillage–Planting Systems

Tải bản đầy đủ ngay(0 tr)

×