Transcript Document

Phosphorus Fertilizer
Needs in North America
18th Annual Regional Phosphate
Conference, Lakeland, Florida October
16, 2003
Paul Fixen
Potash & Phosphate Institute
Slide set available at
http://www.ppi-ppic.org/ppiweb/napro.nsf
Take away messages about
phosphorus in North America
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Phosphorus removed from U.S. farmlands by today’s crops exceeds
use by 30% if manure P is ignored due to its localized use.
Counting all recoverable manure P as agronomically useful, results
in a barely balanced budget, giving no opportunity to improve
soil fertility or meet needs of the higher yielding crops of the future.
Nearly one out of every two soils sampled today indicates a need
for a balanced or surplus P budget to produce to full potential.
An increase in P use must occur on many fields for farming
systems to be sustainable … based on simple arithmetic.
The fertilizer industry has several excellent new programs in place
to increase awareness of P shortages.
Solid science-based evidence indicates an increasing
role for fertilizer P in North American agriculture
Consumption of N, P2O5, and K2O in the
14
U.S.
Consumption, million tons
12
N
P2O5
K2O
10
8
6
4
2
Current P consumption is similar to the late 1960s
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
Year
1985
1990
1995
2000
U.S. phosphate fertilizer
consumption by crop in 2001
Total P2O5 consumption
4.3 million short tons
Sorghum, 2.5%
Other crops
17.6%
Potatoes, 2.5%
Corn grain
38.4%
Cotton, 3.6%
Corn silage, 3.7%
Alfalfa
7.5%
Soybeans
7.7%
USDA-ERS, USDA-NASS, AAPFCO, PPI
Wheat
16.5%
Fertilizer use on corn in the U.S.
140
N
Rate Applied, lb/A .
120
100
80
K2O
60
P2O5
40
20
Current P rates on corn are similar to the late 1960s
0
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
Data source: USDA-ERS Chemical Use Survey
1985
1990
1995
2000
Crop yield trends in the U.S. and Canada
Corn yields
have
increased
75%
150
Corn
140
130
Yield (bu/A)
Since the
late 1960s
in the U.S.
120
U.S.
y = 1.87x - 3610
Canada
y = 1.14x - 2160
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
50
40
Yield (bu/A)
Wheat yields
have
increased
40%
45
U.S.
y = 0.407x - 773
Canada
y = 0.359x - 682
1985
1990
1995
2000
1995
2000
Wheat
35
30
25
20
15
10
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
During this
time period
P fertilizer use
was flat or
decreasing
while P
removal by
higher
yielding crops
was markedly
increasing.
Will the back end of a cow and nutrient
management planning put you out of business?
Need to put manure P in perspective
Manure P in the U.S. in 1997 according
to NRCS relative to fertilizer P
Nutrient category
Commercial Fert. (2000)
All livestock
Confined livestock
Recoverable
Farm-level excess
Data: Kellogg et al., 2000
Manure data source: Kellogg et al., 2000
Million lb
P2PO
2O
55
8,600
8,794
4,031
3,290
2,128
Partial P budgets for the U.S. and
selected states (average of 1998-2000)
Region
Crop
Applied
Recov.
Removal1
fertilizer2
manure3
Removal to use
fertilizer
Fert + man
------- P2O5, million lbs -----U.S.
11,400
8,800
3,300
1.30
0.94
IL
1,126
705
77
1.60
1.44
IA
1,100
621
234
1.77
1.29
NC
116
207
250
0.56
0.25
1 Potash
& Phosphate Institute (0.35 lb P2O5/bu corn for IA).
2 Terry and Kirby, 2000, 2001. 3 Kellog et al., 2000 (1997 production).
Ratio of P removal by crops to fertilizer
applied.
BC
AB
MB
SK
ON
PQ
PEI
WA
NB
ME
MT
ND
NS
MN
OR
VT
ID
MI
MA
CT
WY
IA
PA
NE
NV
IL
IN
OH
VA
MO
KS
KY
NC
AZ
DE
WV
CO
CA
NJ
MD
UT
TN
OK
NM
AR
SC
MS
TX
AL
GA
LA
FL
R/F
NH
NY
WI
SD
RI
0.00-0.49
0.50-0.89
0.90-1.09
1.10-1.49
>1.50
Ratio of P removal by crops to fertilizer
applied plus recoverable manure.
BC
AB
MB
SK
ON
PQ
PEI
WA
NB
ME
MT
ND
NS
MN
OR
ID
NH
NY
WI
SD
MI
MA
CT
WY
IA
PA
NE
NV
IL
IN
KY
NC
AZ
DE
VA
MO
KS
TN
OK
NM
AR
SC
MS
TX
AL
>1.50
MD
WV
CO
RI
0.00-0.49
0.50-0.89
0.90-1.09
1.10-1.49
NJ
OH
UT
CA
R/(F+M)
VT
GA
LA
FL
Yield
P2O5 removal
P2O5 rate
Applied-removed
Eroded P2O5
Manure
P2O5
Yield
(U.S.
avg)
bu/A
lb/A
lb/A
lb/A
lb/A
lb/A
bu/A
72
32
64
32
6
1970
5
72
91
40
57
17
4
1980
5
91
119
52
51
-1
3
1990
5
119
137
60
47
-13
2
2000
5
137
32
40
52
60
13(L)
6
23(H)
4
28(H)
3
An Acre of Corn, 1970 to 2000
Crop removal
Soil test P*
lb P2O5/A
ppm
Erosion loss
lb P2O5/A
Fertilizer use
lb P2O5/A
Corn price
Manure
use
P2O5 price
Balance
$/bu
lb$/bu
P2O5/A
lb P2O5/A
Fert cost
$/A
Fert cost
bu/A
Fert cost, % of crop value
25(H)
2
64
57
51
44
1.33
3.12
2.28
1.85
5
5
5
5
0.10
0.32
0.24
0.19
31
18
1
-13
Two
decades18.24
of building 12.24
soil P One decade
6.40
8.93
of mining
4.8
5.8
5.4
4.8
6.7
6.4
4.5
3.5
P2O5, lb/A
Average P use on corn and soybeans
relative to crop removal
50
45
40
Gap is
Use
growing
35
30
25
Removal
20
15
10
1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000
What are the consequences of negative
P budgets in crop production?
It depends on the existing soil test level
Soil Test Level vs. Relative Yield
Relative yield (%)
100
Mining reduces
yield, quality,
& land value
Critical range
Soil test level
Mining has
no effect
(land value?)
AnAnextreme
extreme case case
298 lb P2O5 in 1975
Year
Webb et al., 1992 (Iowa)
1989
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
1982
1981
1980
1979
1978
1977
1976
0 lb P2O5 in 1975
1975
Bray P1 (ppm)
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
How does soil test P change with a
negative budget?
An insidious decline
resulting in gradual
erosion of potential
Percent of Soils Testing Medium or Lower
in P in 2001 (at or below critical)
BC
AB
MB
SK
37
59 86
73
26
40
50
28
45
78
78
25
21
41 52 58
47
70
38
69
24 25
36
16
39
59
58 59
42 45 53
15 25
47 34
60
46
69
47
ON
PQ
PEI
WA
NB
ME
MT
ND
NS
MN
OR
VT
ID
NH
NY
WI
SD
MI
MA
CT
WY
IA
PA
NE
NV
IL
IN
CA
NJ
OH
MD
UT
DE
WV
CO
RI
VA
MO
KS
KY
AZ
62
OK
NM
57
AR
68 37
MS
AL
31
46
NC
60
SC
GA
60 79 61
59 58
TX
North America
47%
TN
LA
FL
51
22
18
Based on
2.5 million
soil samples
Percent of Soil Samples Testing Medium or
below in P in the Great Plains and Corn Belt
90
AB SK MB SD ND
Medium or below , %
80
70
NE KS OK
60
50
40
30
1970
IA IL IN MN NE OH
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
For the six leading corn producing states, survey trends suggest that soils
have been slipping from high back into medium since about 1990.
Nearly one out of every two soil
samples today indicates a need for a
balanced or surplus P budget to
produce to full potential
… and strong evidence indicates its
not happening.
What is PPI/FAR doing to make it happen?
 Coordinate university-based research to develop strong
P recommendations

KSU P Fellowship Center of Excellence Program

Funded directly by Agrium,Cargill,IMC,PCS,Simplot
 Conduct soil test summaries – 2001, 2005
 Published: Plant Nutrient Use in North American
Agriculture – source of much of today’s data
 Educational materials on P, soil testing, & budgets




P nutrition PPT series (slides, speaker notes, references)
Site-specific precision ag materials … low P areas within fields
PKalc: user friendly nutrient budget software … takes it to the farm
Numerous other items: www.ppi-ppic.org
 Work with NRCS and other agencies on P policy and
water quality issues – part of solution not part of problem
 Provide technical support directly to our members
Examples of member programs
Directed at crop advisers
and farmers. Focused
on the basics of soil testing
and balanced nutrition.
P-specific campaign
with public and private
sector partners to educate
crop advisers, farmers and
the ag media (launched in
September, 2003).
Multi-media program to educate the industry
and arm them to communicate positive
messages about P and other nutrients to their
customers and communities.
Take away messages about
phosphorus in North America
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Phosphorus removed from U.S. farmlands by today’s crops exceeds
use by 30% if manure P is ignored due to its localized use.
Counting all recoverable manure P as agronomically useful, results
in a barely balanced budget, giving no opportunity to improve
soil fertility or meet needs of the higher yielding crops of the future.
Nearly one out of every two soils sampled today indicates a need
for a balanced or surplus P budget to produce to full potential.
An increase in P use must occur on many fields for farming
systems to be sustainable … based on simple arithmetic.
The fertilizer industry has several excellent new programs in place
to increase awareness of P shortages.
… and solid science-based evidence
indicates it can have an increasing role
in North American agriculture