Advantages of glyphosate in Conservation Agriculture conditions

1. Roundup Ready® Maize Symposium
Brussels, 22-24 March 2010
22-
Advantages of glyphosate in
Conservation Agriculture conditions
Emilio-Jesús GONZÁLEZ-SÁNCHEZ
AEAC.SV – ECAF – University of Córdoba

2. Did you know that….?
that….?
One hectare of soil contains the equivalent in weight of one
cow of bacteria, two sheep of protozoa, and four rabbits
of soil fauna.
Every year, soil organisms process an amount of organic
matter equivalent in weight to 25 cars per hectare.
Several soil organisms can help plants to fight against
aboveground pests and herbivores.
The elimination of earthworm populations can reduce
the water infiltration rate in soil by up to 93%.
The improper management of soil biodiversity
worldwide has been estimated to cause a loss of 1 trillion
dollars per year.
European Commission
Soils can help fight climate change. DG ENV, 2010

3. MOST OF THE
DAMAGE TO SOILS IS
CAUSED BY
INTENSIVE TILLAGE
BASED PRACTISES

4. ENVIRONMENTAL PROBLEMS
TYPE OF Erosion / Decrease in CO2 Decrease in Pollution of Pollution by
Compactation
AGRICULTURE Desertification OM Emissions biodiversity water pesticides
Conservation
Highly positive effects
agriculture
Conventional
Very negative effects
Tillage
Positive Very
effect; positive
Organic Little positive effects, unless Conservation Agriculture
lower effect; No
farming techniques are implemented
content in pesticide
N, P, K residues
Positive Positive
effect; effect;
Integrated Little positive effects, unless Conservation Agriculture
lower pesticide
farming techniques are implemented
content in residues
nutrients decrease

5. Soria
Erosion in Spain

6. An easy formula, about soils
Range of depth values vary: 50-500 mm
Average of erosion rate: 0.005 to 5 mm per year
Time to exhaust: 10 years in the worst cases !!!
Some A horizons are already exhausted today

7. XXth Century conventional model
7

8. Conventional practises have driven to…..
to…..
Soil degradation
Water contamination
Low soil Organic Matter contents
Loss of fertility
Lower water availability for crops
Loss of biodiversity
Agriculture and Climate change: 10% GHG
High energy consumption, poor efficiency
Reduced profitability at farm level

9. Soil erosion is a major environmental problem

10. Soil is a non renewable resource

11. TILLAGE HELPS TO “DISGUISE” THE EROSION PROBLEMS

12. The risk of ploughing
sometimes is not
visible.

13. Negatives externalities of soil erosion: dams collapsed
erosion:

15. Soil erosion and Organic Matter close relationship
Maps of risk of soil erosion and OM contents
JRC – European Commission (2003, 2004)

16. Losses of Soil Carbon by the use of ploughs
Adapted from Reicosky, 2005
CO2
CO 2

17. Burnings+ploughs:
Burnings+ploughs: High releases of CO2 17

18. Water pollutants
1. Sediments
2. Nutrients
3. Pathogens
4. O.M.
5. Metals
6. Pesticides
Christensen, 1995

19. Rivers full of sediments

20. CONSERVATION AGRICULTURE is the
synonymous with SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE
Conservation agriculture (CA) aims to achieve
sustainable and profitable agriculture and subsequently
aimes at improved livelihoods of farmers through the
application of the three CA principles: minimal soil
disturbance, permanent soil cover and crop
rotations. CA holds tremendous potential for all sizes of
farms and agro-ecological systems, but its adoption is
perhaps most urgently required by smallholder farmers,
especially those facing acute labour shortages. It is a way
to combine profitable agricultural production with
environmental concerns and sustainability and it
has been proven to work in a variety of
agroecological zones and farming systems. It is been
perceived by practitioners as a valid tool for Sustainable
Land Management (SLM). FAO, 2010

21. Conservation Agriculture: the techniques
Herbaceous crops
No tillage
Woody crops
Cover crops

22. Conservation Agriculture: the adoption in Europe
Cover crops Total
Minimum tillage No-till in perennial surface % NT/arable % CA/arable
Country
(1000 ha) (1000 ha) woody crops CA (1000 land land
(1000 ha) ha)
Belgium 140 n.d. n.d. 140 17.2
Denmark 230 n.d. n.d. 230 10.1
Finland 550 200 n.d. 750 9.1 34.1
France 3750 150 n.d. 3900 0.8 21.1
Germany 2300 200 n.d. 2500 1.7 21.2
Greece 230 100 n.d. 430 3.7 15.8
Ireland 10 n.d. n.d. 10 0.9
Italy 480 80 n.d. 560 1.0 6.8
Hungary 490 10 n.d. 500 0.2 10.8
Portugal 300 80 30 410 4.0 20.6
Russia 15000 500 n.d. 15500 0.4 12.6
Slovak
Republic 320 130 7 457 9.1 31.9
Spain 1500 700 850 3050 5.1 22.2
Switzerland 80 12 10 102 2.9 24.9
United
Kingdom 2500 180 n.d. 2680 3.1 46.6
Total 27880 2342 31220 1.2 15.7
(data ECAF 2006/07)

23. 23

25. 25

27. Why do farmers practise Conservation Agriculture?
1. Stop to soil erosion
2. Cost reduction
3. Time saving
4. Environmental-friendly
5. Water increased for crops
6. Higher yields
7. Increase in fertility
8. Easier machinery traffic AEAC/SV survey, 2002

28. Why the EU and National Governments should
actively promote Conservation Agriculture?
Sustainable system
CA
Fight climate change
Energetically efficient
Budget friendly-CAP
Food security
Environmental key issues
…. a win-win practice!

29. AEAC/SV monitoring farms

30. 20
18 0-30%
Unprotected Soil
16 30-60 %
Protected Soil
14
60-100%
Very Protected Soil
rosion (tn/ha)
12
10
Er
8
6
4
2
0
10 30 50 70 90
0 20 40 60 80 100
Cover (%)
AEAC/SV, 2003-2007

31. Runoff: - 70 % Erosion: - 92 %
300 40
Conservation Agriculture
Conventional Tillage
250 A
A
A
30
200
A
R un O ff (l/m 2 )
osion (tn/ha)
A
150 20
Ero
A
u
B
100
B A
10 A A
A
50 B B
B B
B B B
B
0 0
C3 C4 C5 J1 J2 S2 H1 H2 H4 C3 C4 C5 J1 J2 S2 H1 H2 H4
Experimental Fields Experimental Fields
AEAC/SV, 2003-2007

32. A key point for water infiltration:
infiltration:
stubble management
Usually, the more the better Very clear effects
<30 % >60 % 100 %
1 ,350 kg/ha 5,760 kg/ha 11,160 kg/ha
Adapted from López, 2010

33. Increased infiltration
34%
9%
0%
1,350 kg/ha 5,760 kg/ha 11,160 kg/ha
Adapted from López, 2010

34. 16 1600
Conventional Tillage
Conservation Agriculture
A
12 1200
NO3 acumulated (Kg /ha)
P Acumulated (g /ha)
8 800
A
4 400
B
B
0 0
J H J H
Experimental Fields Experimental Fields
600
A
500
M.O. Acumulated (Kg /ha)
400
A
300
200
100
B B
0
J
Acumulated Fields
H
AEAC/SV, 2003-2007

35. Nitrog in run off (kg/ha)
gen
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
29
AEAC/SV, 2008
jun
io
23 60
ag
o
25 sto
se 06
30 p 06
oc
t0
6
28
dic
06 06
fe b
15
m a 07
2 rzo
114 ab 07
30 ma ril 0
m yo 7
29 ayo 07
jun 07
io
07
Prec
N CT
05
N CC
Date
se
10 p 07
Run off CT
Run off CC
07 oct 0
30 nov 7
no 07
v0
29 7
en
05 ero
m a 08
rzo
23 08
ab
ril
08
Run off (l/m2)
0
10
20
30
CT: conventional tillage
CC: cover crop
0
50
300
250
200
150
100
Pr
recipitation (mm)

36. Reductions CA vs. Conventional
NO3-: - 35%
P: - 27%
K: - 21 %
OM in sediment: - 78 %
CA increases
OM 0-5 cm: + 88 %
OM 0-25 cm: + 46%
Earthworms (g): + 667%
AEAC/SV, 2003-2007

37. A simple but revealing experiment
La cobertura facilita la infiltración de agua en el perfil de suelo

38. CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE

39. NO TILLAGE

40. The best soil carbon management
RATES OF CO2 FIXATION
Carbon Fixation rate
Reductions in CO2 emissions
CA vs. Plough (kg ha-1 year-1)
based Emissions from Emissions due to
CA <10 CA >10
systems soil energy use
years years
(kg ha-1 h-1) (kg ha-1 year-1)
Cover crops in
5 680 1 310 No data available 30.88
olives groves
MEASURE 4.1: OLIVE
Hectares
GROVES UNDER CA t CO2 fixed
(2000-2006)
IN HIGH SLOPES
Year 1 90,167 514,933
Year 2 74,419 424,998
Year 3 144,998 828,066
Year 4 135,060 771,311
Year 5 158,462 904,957
Year 6 145,371 830,196
Year 7 127,785 729,765
The total ammount of Carbon Dioxide sequestered thanks to this
Agrienvironmental measure in Andalusia (Spain) were 5 004 227 t CO2 ,
saving the emissions made by ~0.5 million Spanish citizens by 2002

42. Productivity in terms of energy use
Conventional Minimum No Tillage
Tillage Tillage
Andalucía YIELD kg / GJ
Sunflower after wheat 230 350 500
Chickpea af. sunflower 60 70 80
Wheat af. chickpea 310 280 320
Madrid YIELD kg / GJ
Barley 240 280 270
Wheat af. fallow 260 320 310
Vetch af. wheat 1360 1470 1600
AEAC/SV-IDAE, 2009

43. Energy use
Conventional Minimum No Tillage
Tillage Tillage
Andalucía GJ / ha
Sunflower after wheat 4,1 3,2 2,2
Chickpea af. sunflower 11,6 10,8 9,9
Wheat af. chickpea 17,8 16,9 16,2
Madrid GJ / ha
Barley 12,2 11,3 11,1
Wheat af. fallow 18 16 16,2
Vetch af. wheat 5,6 4,9 5,0
AEAC/SV-IDAE, 2009

44. FUEL CONSUMPTION (in L) IN WHEAT
42,5
50
32,9
40
20,7
30
20
10
0
Conventional No Tillage Minimum
Tillage Tillage
Perea y Gil, 2005

45. Labour time in Wheat in South Spain
4
3,1
Time (hour per hectare)
3 2,4
2 1,4
1
0
Conventional Minimum No Tillage
Tillage Tillage
Perea y Gil, 2005

46. FUEL CONSUMPTION (in L) IN SUNFLOWER
67,6
70
60
50 39,7
40
21,7
30
20
10
0
Conventional Minimum No Tillage
Tillage Tillage
Perea y Gil, 2005

47. Labour time in Sunflower in South Spain
5
5
4
Time hours per hectare
3
3
2
2
1
0
Laboreo
Conventional Laboreo
Minimum Siembra Directa
No Tillage
Convencional Mínimo
Tillage Tillage
Perea y Gil, 2005

48. Soil compaction: influence of cover crop
200
180
160
140
120 sin cubierta
I (%)
100 con cubierta
80
60
40
20
0
N. convencionales N. alta flotación
Gil, 2005

49. Compaction effect on crops, silty soils
NO TILLAGE
CONVENTIONAL TILLAGE

50. AGRI-
AGRI-ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES-SPAIN 2007-13
MEASURES- 2007-
REGION MEASURE SUBSIDY
Andalucía No tillage 59,04 €/ha
Cover crops in vineyards 102,00 €/ha-200,00
€/ha
Aragón Stubble maintain 60,00 €/ha-72,00 €/ha
Conservation agriculture in orchads 218,00 €/ha-407,00
€/ha
Castilla La Cover crops in woody crops 139,00 €/ha
Mancha
Galicia No tillage and cover crops 60 €/ha (herbaceous)
140 €/ha (woody)
Madrid No tillage 200 € herbáceos
País Vasco Cover crops in herbaceous crops 144,59 €/ha
inbetween main crops
Cover crops in woody crops 90,65 €/ha
La Rioja Cover crops in woody crops 135,00 €/ha
Asturias Cover crops in woody crops 132,22 €/ha

51. Soil Framework Directive
Economic cost for Society due to soil
degradation
European Commission (COM(2006) 231)
PROBLEM COST ( x € 1000 000 000)
Erosion Between 0,7 y 14
Decrease in Organic Matter Between 3,4 y 5,6
Compactation Cannot be estimated
Salinization Between 158 y 321
Flooding Up to 1,2 per event
Pollution Between 2,4 y 17,3
Compactation Cannot be estimated
Despite the efforts of several Presidencies, the Council has been so far
unable to reach a political agreement on this legislative proposal due to the
opposition of a number of Member States constituting a blocking minority.
The latest discussions during the Czech Presidency (first half of 2009) have
not changed this situation.

52. MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
on EU agriculture and climate change
(2009/2157(INI))
Organic farming and integrated pest management practices are among the
ways
ecologically effective systems necessitating further development. However,
must also be found to facilitate a transition to more
sustainable agriculture in the case of the other systems
used on most farmland.
Such solutions do exist. In particular, the CAP must
take account practices (such as conservation farming)
involving simplified cultivation techniques (such as reduced or
no-tillage and leaving crop residues on the ground)
provide plant cover and facilitate intercropping and crop
rotation, thereby maximising photosynthesis and helping to
enrich the soil with organic matter. This has been
demonstrated, by the SoCo project launched at the EP’s
instigation. Such practices also have an economic benefit insofar
as they reduce the use of energy and of certain inputs.

53. About glyphosate use in Conservation Agriculture
Glyphosate is applied by thousands of
farmers practising CA worldwide with highly
positive results.
Its use in CA conditions is much safer in
comparison with conventional uses.
Top environmental and economical benefits
have been demonstrated worldwide in farms
safely using glyphosate in the framework of
CA.

54. CONCLUSIONS
1. Conservation agriculture is the best
agrarian option for achieving the social and
environmental challenges for XXI century.
2. In the EU new approaches are needed.
Other agricultural practices, even being
positive in some aspects, are not a holistic
solution for European agriculture.
3. Policy makers should take into account solid
scientific data and successful local
experiences to openly support
Conservation Agriculture in the EU.

56. LIFE + AGRICARBON. Some basic data
Duration of the project:
48 months (01/01/2010 – 31/12/2013)
Generic Theme:
Reduction of emission of GHG
Coordinating beneficiary:
AEAC.SV (Spanish Association for Conservation
Agriculture . Living Soils) – Non profit making
association. www.aeac-sv.org
Associated beneficiaries:
◦ University of Córdoba (Spain)
◦ IFAPA (Spain)
◦ European Conservation Agriculture Federation – ECAF (Belgium)

57. Proyect LIFE + AGRICARBON
This project aims to
encourage the progressive
establishment of sustainable
agricultural techniques (CA
and PA), contributing to
GHG emission decreases
and the adaptation of the
agricultural system to the
new climate conditionants
found in global warming.

58. Proyect LIFE + AGRICARBON
Main actions
• Verification and demonstration of adaptive
capacity of CA and PA to the expected climate
change variations by the evaluation of grain yields
and quality parameters, and of the moisture content in
the soil (Objectives 1 and 2).
• CO2 emission and energy evaluation of farms via
a virtual management digital platform through a web
page. (Objective 3).
• Verification of the sink effect of CA, by the study
of carbon sequester rates from laboratory analyses of
the organic matter content evolution in soil samples
taken at different depths (Objective 4).

59. Proyect LIFE + AGRICARBON:
Sinergies
MITIGATION AND ADAPTATION TO CLIMATE CHANGE
Conservation Agriculture:
• Use soil as carbon sink.
• Reduces CO2 emissions due to the no tillage of the soil.
• Need much less fuel in farms.
• Promotes a better water use by crops, specially important in
drought conditions.
Precision Agriculture:
• Helps better tractor driving, avoiding overlaps, meaning less inputs
needed in farms.
• Optimise the use of agrichemicals.

60. Soon www.agricarbon.eu

61. Thank you for your attention
Meet you in Madrid, October 4-7, 2010
www.eurocongressca.eu
egonzalez@aeac-sv.org