Effect of field geometry on profitability of automatic section control for chemical application equipment
- 350 Downloads
Understanding how field geometry is related to over-application of inputs may help farmers make more informed decisions about investment in automatic section control (ASC) technology. The technology helps reduce input application overlap and therefore reduces input costs. The influence of field geometry on the profitability of ASC technology for chemical application was evaluated using overlap data estimated for 44 farm fields in Tennessee, USA. Reduction in overlap with ASC was defined as the difference in area sprayed controlling the entire boom as one section and area sprayed using seven-section ASC. Perimeter (m)-to-area (m2) ratio (P/A, m−1) was used to categorize estimated chemical overlap by field size and shape. Estimated median reductions in overlap with ASC were 3.00 % for fields with P/A = 0.01, 9.65 % for fields with P/A = 0.02 and 13.50 % for fields with P/A ≥ 0.03. For a typical size cotton farm in Tennessee, investing in ASC was not likely to be profitable for fields with P/A = 0.01 but was generally profitable for fields with P/A ≥ 0.02. The low reduction in overlap for P/A = 0.01 with ASC resulted in chemical savings that were too small to pay back the investment in ASC within the useful life assumed for the technology and provide a minimum rate of return. Thus, P/A as a measure of field geometry may be useful for evaluating investments in ASC technologies.
KeywordsChemical application Economic analysis Precision spraying
This research was made possible with partial funding by Cotton Incorporated through CI 07-132 and CSREES/USDA through Hatch Project TEN00442.
- ASABE. (2011). Agricultural Machinery Management Data. ASAE D497.7. St. Joseph, MI: American Society of Agricultural and Biological Engineers.Google Scholar
- Bhandari, S. B. (2009). Discounted payback period-some extensions. Journal of Business and Behavioral Sciences, 21, 28–39.Google Scholar
- Clemen, R. T., & Reilly, T. (2001). Making hard decisions. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury Press.Google Scholar
- Jernigan, B. (2012). Defining and modeling parameters associated with double-planted areas in row crop production fields. M.S. Thesis, The University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN.Google Scholar
- Larson, J. A., Mooney, D. F., Roberts, R. K., & English, B. C. (2010). A computer decision aid for the cotton precision agriculture investment decision. In R. Khosla (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Precision Agriculture. ISPA: Monticello, IL.Google Scholar
- Lowenberg-Deboer, J. (1999). Risk management potential of precision farming technologies. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 31, 275–285.Google Scholar
- National Research Council. (1997). Precision Agriculture in the 21st Century: Geospatial and Information Technologies in Crop Management. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Oriade, C. A., King, R. P., Forcella, R. F., & Gunsolus, J. L. (1996). A bioeconomic analysis of site specific management for weed control. Review of Agricultural Economics, 18, 523–535.Google Scholar
- Robertson, M., Carberry, P., & Brennan, L. (2007). The economic benefits of precision agriculture: case studies from Australian grain farms. http://www.grdc.com.au/uploads/documents/Economics%20of%20Precision%20agriculture%20Report%20to%20GRDC%20final.pdf. Accessed 10 June 2015.
- Smith, C. M., Dhuyvetter, K. C., Kastens, T. L., Kastens, D. L., & Smith, L. M. (2013). Economics of precision agricultural technologies in the great plains. Journal of the American Society of Farm Managers & Rural Appraisers, 76(1), 185–206.Google Scholar
- The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN, USA: Agricultural & Resource Economics. (2013). Field Crop Budgets for 2013. http://economics.ag.utk.edu/budgets/2013/CropBudgets2013.pdf. Accessed 03 June 2015.
- Tiffany, D.G., Ford, K., & Eidman, V. (2000). Grower paths to profitable usage of precision agriculture technologies, In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Precision Agriculture Technologies, Madison, WI: ASA, CSSA and SSSA. CD-ROM.Google Scholar
- Tozer, P. (2008). Uncertainty and investment in precision agriculture—Is it worth the money? In R. Khosla (Ed.), Proceedings of the 9th international conference on precision agriculture. ISPA. CD-ROM: Monticello, IL.Google Scholar
- USDA-ERS (US Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service). (2014). Commodity costs and returns: Data. Washington, DC, USA: US Department of Agriculture. http://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/commodity-costs-and-returns.aspx. Accessed 28 November 2014.
- USDA-NASS (US Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service). (2013). 2013 agricultural statistics. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
- USDA-NASS (US Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service). (2014). 2012 census of agriculture. Washington, DC: US Department of Agriculture.Google Scholar
- Yu, M., Segarra, E., Lascano, R., & Booker, J. (2003). Economic impacts of precision farming in irrigated agriculture. The Texas Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources, 16, 1–14.Google Scholar