HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Figures Only Full Text Free Full Text (PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Pendell, D. L. Articles by Boyles, S. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Pendell, D. L. Articles by Boyles, S. B. Agricola Articles by Pendell, D. L. Articles by Boyles, S. B. Related Collections Economics Best Management Practices Carbon Sequestration

Economic Feasibility of No-Tillage and Manure for Soil Carbon Sequestration in Corn Production in Northeastern Kansas

^a Department of Agricultural Economics, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-4011
^b Department of Agronomy, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-5501
^c Kansas Industrial Extension Service, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-2508

^* Corresponding author (jwilliam{at}agecon.ksu.edu)

Received for publication April 26, 2005. This study examined the economic potential of no-tillage versus conventional tillage to sequester soil carbon by using two rates of commercial N fertilizer or beef cattle manure for continuous corn (Zea mays L.) production. Yields, input rates, field operations, and prices from an experiment were used to simulate a distribution of net returns for eight production systems. Carbon release values from direct, embodied, and feedstock energies were estimated for each system, and were used with soil carbon sequestration rates from soil tests to determine the amount of net carbon sequestered by each system. The values of carbon credits that provide an incentive for managers to adopt production systems that sequester carbon at greater rates were derived. No-till systems had greater annual soil carbon gains, net carbon gains, and net returns than conventional tillage systems. Systems that used beef cattle manure had greater soil carbon gains and net carbon gains, but lower net returns, than systems that used commercial N fertilizer. Carbon credits would be needed to encourage the use of manure-fertilized cropping systems.

Abbreviations: CT, conventional tillage • CT84M, conventional tillage, with 84 kg N/ha from beef cattle manure • CT84N, conventional tillage, with 84 kg N/ha from commercial N fertilizer • CT168M, conventional tillage, with 168 kg N/ha from beef cattle manure • CT168N, conventional tillage, with 168 kg N/ha from commercial N fertilizer • NT, no-tillage • NT84M, no-tillage, with 84 kg N/ha from beef cattle manure • NT84N, no-tillage, with 84 kg N/ha from commercial N fertilizer • NT168M, no-tillage, with 168 kg N/ha from beef cattle manure • NT168N, no-tillage, with 168 kg N/ha from commercial N fertilizer

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K.B. Watkins, J.L. Hill, and M.M. Anders An economic risk analysis of no-till management and rental arrangements in Arkansas rice production Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, July 1, 2008; 63(4): 242 - 250. [Abstract] [PDF]