Opportunities to utilise our minerals are few and far beween in NZ, and we look with envy at how Australia has been able to build a robust economy around theirs.
This venture utilising our lignite reserves to produce nitrogen fertiliser looks an exciting opportunity.
But it does raise another question.
NZ agriculture has prided itself on its low cost grass production systems based around white clover fixing its nitrogen for free.
Has our drive to maximise production clouded our judgement, and is our future production going to be driven by "what comes out of a bag", similar to British agriculture?
As we now see in profits from sheep and beef farms, (and dairy farms when the payout was lower), it's increasing costs that kill profits.
Is a more N fertiliser pasture system giving extra production but at the expense of profit?
Transforming Southland lignite to fertiliser would pump an estimated $377 million a year into the NZ economy, based on the present international price for urea. Joint venture partners Solid Energy and Ravensdown have been crunching the numbers as part of their investigations into a lignite-to-fertiliser plant in the Gore district reports Stuff.
Solid Energy has access to an estimated 1.3 billion tonnes of lignite in the district and has several multi-million dollar projects on the drawing board, including two pilot plants to be operational by next year and the lignite-to-urea plant, scheduled for commissioning in 2016. The plant would create about 500 jobs and turn an estimated two million tonnes of lignite into 1.2 million tonnes of urea annually.
The Government-owned coal miner and farmer-owned fertiliser co-operative yesterday trumpeted the economic benefits of unlocking "the previously unused (and) under-utilised resource to make NZ fundamentally wealthier". At today's world urea price of US$265 per tonne ($362), the NZ GDP would be up UD$377m a year.
Ravensdown strategic development general manager Richard Christie said both companies were enthusiastic about bringing new technologies to NZ that would release the value of the lignite resources in Eastern Southland, create high-value fertiliser to replace imports and provide export potential.
3 Comments
Regional Councils have restrictions on how much nitrogen can be applied to pasture and farmers are required to do nutrient budgets to show what they are putting on. At the end of each financial year the fertiliser companies send out to farmers a summary of how much N P K etc they have purchased.
It will not result in more nitrogen being used, but hopefully it will result in lower costs to the farmer and for the farmer fertiliser co-ops an income stream of exporting urea.
Grass production with urea or clover?
I thought I was going to see a debate on the pros & cons. After years of taking advice from the fertiliser company reps and applying the recommended NPK with poor long term results, I decided to do more research and found that balancing the soils minerals and enhancing the microbes was the first requirement.
P & K were required but in small amounts, other elements were needed and thus I have balanced some paddocks with amazing results and the clover is abundant and the falacy of N has been negated. (I must say this is for my property)
I question the way Ravensdown are leading the sales pitch on N as a be all solution. In my opinion it is a short term fix for long term degradation of the soil especially the biological effect on microbes etc.
I do commend the fact that urea (if needed) is better off produced internally rather than imported.
Dave I agree with your comments. We gave up years ago taking fert company's recommendations at face value and also work on applying what the soil needs to be balanced. We too have had good success with this and saved huge sums of money over the time we have been doing it. A couple of years ago we saved over $50,000 in just that year. Farming need not be complicated, though many companies (and scientists) like to make it appear so.
The success or otherwise of the system we follow often depends on the skill of the individual farmer in understanding his/her farms soil type and structure and their dedication to finding simpler solutions.
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.