Webinar Q&A
December 18, 2009 Thank you for attending the recent Webinar, PrecisionAg 2.0.
We didn’t have time to answer all of the attendee questions during the live event, so we posed those questions to our speakers later and are providing their answers.
Speaker Contact Info
Kevin Dhuyvetter
Kansas State University
kcd@ksu.edu
Terry Kastens
Kansas State University
terrykastens@agecon.ksu.edu
Dietrich Kastens
Kastens Inc.
dietrich@kastensinc.com
Note: Click here for an archived version of this Webinar.
- Do the panelists see any need for on-the-go sensors for weed control?
- How do you see cellular data and the CORS network in the future of precision ag?
- How important you see the common standards as ISOBUS for VRA?
- Is the cost of VRA applicators a factor in decisions to start/continue using the technology? How are micronutrients typically applied w/ VRA? Will they have their own bins on machines? Are VRA machines easily added on to if dealers decide to start using additional products they have not been currently using?
- How responsive is the VRA technology? Mainly, how quick will rates change as operators are driving along a field applying products? Is this dependent on how intensive the field has been sampled and sample/grid sizes?
- Are there certain distinct areas of NA where VRA technology is being adopted faster/slower than others?
- So what exactly is PrecisionAg 2.0?
- What do you see as the trend as farms get larger in terms of hiring outside consultants part time for areas of precision agriculture (collect, compile, analyze, etc.) versus being able to hire a younger in-house expert of their own?
- Where exactly can you find the KSU GPS guidance spreadsheet?
- The US government is allocating a lot of green money to BMP’s and Nutrient Managment. Will environmental concerns — especially USDA supported — be the prime mover in the future in the adoption of precision ag?
- Who will fund R&D for soil sampling technology?
- Why is North America so slow in having nutrient use ratios compared to the EU?
- Will direct injection of ag chemicals gain adoption in the next 5 years? What are the impediments?
- Will the CORS or DOT signal cause a increase in the use of RTK from it’s availability?
- Will you make this PowerPoint presentation available to downlaod? I teach precision agriculture at a community college in Iowa and would like to use some of the information provided today.
- Won’t variable rate seeding be the in-roads to jumpstarting VRA in general?
- Looking out 10 years, where will precision agriculture be?
Do the panelists see any need for on-the-go sensors for weed control?
A: We I had a student that wrote his master’s thesis on this several years ago now. It appeared that the economics of VRA of herbicides might be good if we could get reliable sensors. It was too expensive using hand methods to assess weeds at the small scale. Of course, one might do some zone application based on broad methods of weed pressure assessment. But, for fine tuning it’ll take some true on-the-go sensors. Although a machine was designed to do just that perhaps 10-15 years ago now, it really never ever gained traction. Identifying weeds on the go is simply a bit difficult; broad things like color (e.g., GreenSeeker) are much easier to assess than weed species. Will it happen? You bet? But probably not for more than 5 years.
Having worked with remotely sensed data at KU (Dietrich), I fully understand the limitations of the sensors when the total volume of “green” vegetation (in this case, weeds) is quite low relative to the surface area. Identification of weed species is nearly impossible using just a handful of spectral bands (today’s sensors are looking at the following wavelengths: red, green and NIR). Hyperspectral sensors (looking at a multitude of wavelengths) will allow better identification of species but we may not see that technology “in the field” for a number of years. I can see this technology really taking off when the systems are in place. Used with a direct injection setup tied to a bunch of different chemicals, we can make herbicide applications more precise and efficient while at the same time providing the tools to better deal with species that are developing resistance to some products.
A couple of other factors that will influence the adoption of, and hence need for, on-the-go sensors is the cost of weed control. The more we rely on chemicals such as glyphosate, the slower the adoption of this type of technology. Thus, the need to adopt this technology will vary considerably from region based on crops produced in the region. Also, to the extent producers perceive there to be a risk of missing some weeds, the more they will continue to use “blanket” applications.
Q: How do you see cellular data and the CORS network in the future of precision ag?
A: Having wall to wall high speed internet available throughout rural America will have significant impacts on agriculture. From conducting office work in the cab to providing the communication mechanism between multiple machines in the same field, this technology (and the communications capabilities it affords) will be quite commonplace in the field over the next decade. It will change how equipment dealers diagnose problems on equipment. The CORS network is a little more of an unknown as it is not a widespread technology yet (lots of holes in the coverage) and it relies on government funding (which can be fickle from year to year). No doubt it will be utilized in those areas where its presence is strong; but, I’m guessing that dealers, farmers, input providers or some other group will set up RTK base stations in areas and simply push corrections to receivers using the cellular based high speed network that everything will be hooked to. Many areas are already covered by RTK networks (private providers) but the coverage is limited by the current radio antennas and terrain. It will be quite easy (and cheap) for all of these existing networks to move to an internet based delivery approach and in fact a lot cheaper in the long run as the old radio antennas will no longer be needed.
Q: How important you see the common standards as ISOBUS for VRA?
A: Standards are typically a good thing (so long as the “rules” aren’t bent too much). But, they typically take forever to get here and when they finally do, the “standard” is out of date. I hope to see more work being done to tie equipment together either with wireless systems or at a minimum single wire solutions (not 2” wide wire bundles, but more like the size of a standard network cable). We spend too much money and time on cabling (especially “specialty” cables that connect systems from different companies). I don’t hear a lot of people hollering about this, so it is not a big priority for the OEM’s and aftermarket guys.
Q: Is the cost of VRA applicators a factor in decisions to start/continue using the technology? How are micronutrients typically applied w/ VRA? Will they have their own bins on machines? Are VRA machines easily added on to if dealers decide to start using additional products they have not been currently using?
A: The direct investment dollars required in machinery is always a factor in technology adoption. But, I don’t think today that it is a particular large impediment to VRA. Likely it is the cost of soil data acquisition and then knowing what to do with it in VRA of crop inputs that is the bigger impediment. Remember, the speed of adoption of a technology depends on size of investment required, what is the expected return on investment, and how much confidence I have in this return. It is this third factor that is the factor holding back adoption more than the cost, i.e., we just aren’t sure if the benefit is there or not.
Also remember that many of the most expensive components have to go on whether a guy does VRA or not (pumps, flow meters, pressure transducers, ball valve shutoffs, etc.)
Q: How responsive is the VRA technology? Mainly, how quick will rates change as operators are driving along a field applying products? Is this dependent on how intensive the field has been sampled and sample/grid sizes?
A: Tough question as the answer depends on a lot of things (equipment, total range of rate changes, ground speed, resolution of VRA map). In our own operation, we have opted to work at a 1-acre resolution as we feel that about any of the different types of VRA rigs we might use will work adequately at this resolution.
Q: Are there certain distinct areas of NA where VRA technology is being adopted faster/slower than others?
A: As was pointed out in the webinar, VRA of certain inputs, especially lime for soil pH mitigation, likely is more popular than VRA of other inputs. But, this observation doesn’t describe a particularly narrow geographical area of NA.
Q: So what exactly is PrecisionAg 2.0?
A: A title given to our presentation by the CropLife Media Group.
Q: What do you see as the trend as farms get larger in terms of hiring outside consultants part time for areas of precision agriculture (collect, compile, analyze, etc.) versus being able to hire a younger in-house expert of their own?
A: While there likely will be a demand for consultants for some time, in the long run they will become relatively less important. That is, in the long-run these services will be done in-house by people employed by the farm. This will both be a causal factor in growth in farm size and it also will be something caused by farm growth (the two go hand in hand).
Q: Technologies such as greenseeker or crop removal calculations for VRA seem to sometimes ignore some of the basics of research agronomy and make assumptions in many areas that depending who you talk to don’t make sense. Do you see automation of agronomics (removal of people) to being the success of precision ag, or the flip side and a more intelligent personal approach being the success?
A: As always, such successes will be driven by a combination of both smart scientists and automated procedures. Just think where medical diagnosis software has gone over the last few years (and even farm machinery diagnostics). Has it diminished the need for doctors (and mechanics)? I doubt it, even though it may have changed their scope. More importantly, it sure has improved the efficacy of doctors (and mechanics). Moreover, it always is important for multi-disciplinary folks to inject new thought in traditional disciplines. Paradigmatic changes arise therefrom. And, it truly is paradigmatic thinking that will move VRA to the next levels. Finally, sometimes it merely takes the prodding of out-of-discipline folks to cause disciplinary folks to think in non-traditional ways. For example, several years ago I discussed the concept of using grain-removal based VRA N fertilization in no-till with three prominent agronomists from three universities. Each said, “you know, after I think about it, it just might work.”
Q: Where exactly can you find the KSU GPS guidance spreadsheet?
A: Click here.
Top
Q: Where is the percentage of adoption of PAg headed? More to input supppliers or more done with farmers’ equipment?
A: As farms grow in size it will be more in-house. But, along the way it will tend to be more by input providers. I know a few years ago many input providers would not have predicted the number of farmer-owned sprayers around today. My guess is that VRA stuff will be similar.
Q: The U.S. government is allocating a lot of green money to BMP’s and Nutrient Managment. Will environmental concerns – especially USDA supported – be the prime mover in the future in the adoption of precision ag?
A: No, not in the nearby future for the vast majority of acres anyway. Of course, politics can quickly change the rules and so I can easily find myself wrong in the future. These incentives will likely be important for some producers, and in some regions, to “take the plunge,” but we don’t believe it will be the “prime mover.”
Q: Who will fund R&D for soil sampling technology?
A: If you mean the physical aspect of collecting soil samples, then virtually no one. There simply isn’t a big enough market for selling the newly invented machines given the cost of inventing/designing them. For example, though I can’t be certain, I really doubt that Deere is working on such things.
Q: Why is North America so slow in having nutrient use ratios compared to the EU?
A: Not as much concern for environmental issues in NA as compared to EU. This is a cultural thing, manifesting itself through the political process.
Q: Will direct injection of ag chemicals gain adoption in the next 5 years? What are the impediments?
A: If you mean some type of direct injection in the soil, e.g., with spoke wheel applicators, the answer is no. They’ve been around for perhaps 10+ years and still haven’t gained traction – I believe travel speed is the issue. If you mean direct injection of chemicals into water lines on sprayers, then the answer is yes in my opinion – due to less potential wastage of chemicals and more precise quantities and less human error potential. Again, this is merely my opinion and I really don’t know particularly well the real-life engineering impediments to such technologies.
Q: Will the CORS or DOT signal cause an increase in the use of RTK from its availability?
A: Not as much as when systems can use any (the closer the better) RTK signal automatically provided through a cellular based internet connection. This will make getting and using RTK easy and cheap (no need for a zillion costly radio repeaters dotting the countryside just to cover a county).
Q: Will you make this PowerPoint presentation available to download? I teach precision agriculture at a community college in Iowa and would like to use some of the information provided today.
A: Two PDF files (one with 4 slides/page and the other with one slide/page) of our slides have been posted theAgManager Web site. Click here to view/download.
Top
Q: Won’t variable rate seeding be the in-roads to jumpstarting VRA in general?
A: Probably not as much as the fact that most new equipment is coming out with VRA capabilities standard (or as a low cost upgrade). Just having the technology already in place will drive folks to figure out how to use it.
Q: After having yield monitors for 15 years, how do we move beyond the real-time information to using the data to improve our decisions? Tthere seems to be a big disconnect here.
A: Yes, as was discussed in the webinar, there is a big disconnect, especially not knowing what algorithms to use to convert yield information to crop input decisions. More to the point, yield generally has been viewed as the caused result of numerous factors (e.g., fertility, variety, weather, etc.). Given the complexity of that causal process, it is difficult to turn yield into a “causal” factor because the factors vary considerably from region to region (i.e., yield models will vary from producer to producer). But, don’t ignore the very large benefit to actually using yield monitor data to aid on-farm research of everything from seeding rates to fertilizer rates to variety trials to foo-foo dust. Remember, it is likely that large, growing, and successful farms will be doing ever more on-farm research in the near future.
Q: Looking out 10 years, where will precision agriculture be?
A: Somewhat more semi-robotics (automation of machinery operational features w/o removing the operator), slightly better electronics compatibility, largely better communication capabilities among machines, very slight improvement in agronomic algorithms to transform site-specific data to VRA of inputs.
Improved software that will allow utilization of “in-house” developed algorithms to move from “data to decisions to implementation” much faster than can be done today. Hopefully, we’ll have more “box” solutions for doing certain activities. For example, software that will quickly look at all data layers and derive VRA nutrient maps while at the same time looking at the as-applied maps and quickly evaluating “what we did in the field”.
Trying to predict technological advances 10 years out when things are moving as fast as they are is risky. It is probably safe to say that we will see “more of the same” in that we will continue to see advancements in the machinery-related technologies, but the agronomic VRA-related advances will occur slower. That is, the ability to physically do VRA will be a non-issue, but the ability to know exactly how to vary inputs (with much confidence) will still be something we struggle with (that doesn’t mean producers won’t be doing it though).
GET THE NEWSLETTER TODAY!
