Farmers living in a 'new age' of fertiliser prices, application: agronomist

Nutrien Ag Solutions agronomist Jim Colquhoun, Traralgon, told the Dairy Farmers Victoria (DFV) forum it was possible to significantly reduce urea usage, while maintaining or increasing production.

"We are looking long term about reducing nitrogen rates and becoming more efficient with our fertiliser use," he said.

Mr Colquhoun presented data on Thexton Farms, East Gippsland, showing use of foliar sprays and a urease inhibitor had resulted in a 12 per cent drop in carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) in 2022/23.

The previous financial year, the amount of CO2-e fell by 29pc.

A urease inhibitor reduced gaseous losses of ammonia, while foliar sprays resulted in fast uptake of nitrogen, potassium and zinc, as well as hormone plant growth regulators, he said.

The farm was also using liquid ammonium sulphate and urea (UAS) as an alternative nitrogen source.

Application of the urease inhibitor, NBPT, contributed to a 37 per cent drop in applied nitrogen last year, compared with 2020/21 and a 25 per cent drop in urea rates.

Winter pasture growth rate was in the range of 20-30 kilograms, per hectare, per day and increased 50pc, through the application of foliar fertiliser in the last two years.

"We are looking to de-risk fertiliser in the business, because over the long term we know the government is potentially going to legislate the amount of nitrogen that is allowed to be applied on farm," Mr Colquhoun said.

"Its already happened in Europe and New Zealand - it's not a matter of 'if', it's when.

"We have to employ other technologies to look to the long term, so we can maintain production, despite restrictions."

In New Zealand, application of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser to grazed land is limited to 190 kilograms per hectare, per year.

Mr Colquhoun said as a result, last financial year between 60-70pc of all urea, applied in New Zealand, was treated with urease inhibitor NBPT.

He said in the "new age" of fertiliser use, paradoxically, the sharp jump in price of urea, due to the Ukrainian war and energy costs, had done farmers a favour in reducing its use.

But he said it was hard to find out what was happening in terms of legislative changes to urea use.

"When you talk to people in government and ask you for comment, they offer no opinion," he said

"Either they don't want to tell you their position, or they don't have a position.

"With what is going on with the Greenhouse gas conversation within government, I would have thought they had a position, but they don't want to frighten anybody."

There was an increased focus by producers on soil health, including regenerative agriculture, looking at soil microbes and bio stimulants, he said.

He told the conference consumers were also increasingly focused on purchasing "sustainably produced" food.

Mr Colquhoun said he wanted to set the international scene as to why things had changed, in fertiliser markets.

"Obviously, government legislation and tariffs have had a major impact, prior to, and post COVID.

"The Chinese can have a major impact on fertiliser markets by deciding they are going to put an export tariff on - at the same time we have had a lot of global uncertainty with energy costs, which all kicked off with (Russian president) Putin invading Ukraine, shutting the ports and a gas line down."

He said fertiliser shortages were not "someone's fault", because they forgot to order a shipment.

"There is a lot going on - farmers need to understand that and try and shore up long term supply," he said.

"When urea prices are at stratospheric levels, none of the traders want to hold 'long product', because they are at risk of a price collapse and holding expensive inventory, which none of the farmers will accept.

"It's a real two-way street - farmers just think someone is trying to shaft them."

"If you are looking for a bellwether sign in fertiliser markets, you have to look at what is happening in energy markets, more specifically natural gas.

"That's the raw material."