Concretisations of the article “Potatoes in 2050: A vision for the future of the global potato industry”

He himself writes that he does not have a good crystal ball, but that lines of development are emerging. It will therefore help us all if every player in the potato business asks themselves whether and how they can fit into this vision. How can we perhaps specify and concretise it – or where can we achieve something? As we are ultimately all shaping the future together, we are also best able to work together on the many individual aspects and visions.

The following text is a contribution from crop.zone to the discussion on the ‘Vision Potato 2050’, which crop.zone, as a provider of electrophysical plant management, considers to be target-orientated. crop.zone works in the field of residue-free desiccation of potatoes, but has an impact far beyond this in the agricultural processes of plant management, from pre-sowing treatment and green manure to the siccation of other crops such as oats.

We take up the core theses of Lukie Pieterse and concretise them from our point of view.

Lukie Pieterse writes: „The year 2024 marks a critical juncture in this journey. With just 26 years until 2050, the potato industry must navigate a rapidly changing landscape characterized by climate change, population growth, resource scarcity, and shifting consumer preferences.“

crop.zone in Vision 2050: At present, the major changes that need to be made are becoming increasingly clear and innovative agricultural technology, as part of the potato industry and agricultural systems, must face up to them. These are turning points that are necessary to master the challenges. To Lukie Pieterse’s list, we would like to emphasize some more specific aspects such as the rapidly changing weather conditions, the increasingly demanding logistics, the question of biodiversity and the handling of soil as probably the scarcest non-renewable resource.

Lukie Pieterse writes: „One of the central pillars of this vision is the development of climate-resilient potato varieties.“

crop.zone in Vision 2050: From crop.zone’s agricultural engineering perspective, climate-adapted potato varieties are important, especially if they require less crop protection. However, as has unfortunately happened too often in the past, this must not lead to soil protection and soil regeneration as well as adapted agricultural technology being neglected. After all, the potato is also nourished by the soil and the soil promotes its quality. It is a complex interplay in which all aspects must be managed together: Complexity management is the name of the challenge.

Lukie Pieterse writes: „In tandem with these biological innovations, the integration of precision agriculture and digital technologies will revolutionize potato farming. The use of data-driven insights, artificial intelligence, and autonomous machinery will allow farmers to optimize every aspect of potato production.“

crop.zone in Vision 2050: It is the task of innovative agricultural technology such as crop.zone to fill the individual aspects rightly mentioned with very specific content. In many places, it will no longer be a question of making individual technical aspects a few per cent more effective. Potato cultivation in particular already utilises many aspects of precision farming. Better AI-based information can help even more farmers to do the right thing even more often and or autonomous AI systems to make competent decisions and support farmers as very good employees. Potatoes ultimately grow in the World of Things, and the Internet of Things can help. However, the concrete tools for fundamental progress remain up for grabs. This is precisely why we need to rethink in many areas. Instead of a little less herbicide or a little more energy-saving ploughing, solutions in plant management are needed, such as siccation with electricity, which do not require any chemical agents and do not move the soil.

Field logistics under the increasingly difficult weather conditions caused by the climate will also be easier if there are simply no more waiting times due to herbicides because siccation is carried out using electricity. Harvesting can take place when the potato is sufficiently firm and that is all that counts.

crop.zone documents all the relevant treatment parameters on the field with precise area accuracy. The data is available to the farmer and is used by crop.zone for further improvements and recommendations on the optimum use of machinery. In this way, once the expertise has been acquired, it can be easily shared and effectively utilised by all users under all complex farming conditions. This helps to alleviate the shortage of skilled labour in the field and turn (semi-)autonomous expert systems into ever better employees for the farmer.

Lukie Pieterse writes: „By 2050, the industry must fully embrace sustainable practices that prioritize environmental stewardship, resource conservation, and waste reduction. This includes adopting regenerative agriculture practices that restore soil health, implementing circular economy principles that turn waste into resources… .“

crop.zone in Vision 2050: In many cases, the regenerative protection and reconstruction of soils will only succeed if soil movement only takes place for absolutely necessary reasons. Ploughing, tilling and hoeing for weed control or to kill growth or green manure are not part of this. This is where electrophysical methods such as those from crop.zone have to step in, without chemical residues and without soil movement and therefore with a very positive influence on soil life.

The crop.zone process has been proven to have no negative impact on soil life during electric potato desiccation. The improved haulm separation by crop.zone reduces losses in the field and also makes sorting work easier for autonomous potato harvester systems. Large working widths compared to haulm toppers and stalk pickers minimise soil compaction between the ridges, which will also help autonomous systems to separate potatoes and clods of soil. Intermediate ridges in potato fields to retain water and minimise erosion are maintained until harvest, which is particularly important during heavy rainfall. Potato ridges are less damaged than with mechanical haulm removal, which in turn maintains quality and reduces crop losses due to green potatoes. Insecticide spraying during the siccation phase can be avoided as the stems do not turn yellow and become attractive to aphids. As crop.zone, unlike haulm topping, does not produce aerosols that are highly contaminated with plant diseases, additional crop protection products or disease-related yield reductions are also avoided in neighbouring fields. crop.zone requires 10 to 40 times less energy than thermal siccation methods that were previously used in organic potato cultivation (from the perspective of 2050). Fossil resources are conserved or no longer needed thanks to fewer passes and the use of regeneratively generated electricity as an active ingredient. Green manure, which binds nitrogen from the air, replaces natural gas for artificial fertilisers. If additional nitrogen is needed, then it will come from green hydrogen or directly from electricity. A circular economy, even with residual materials, only works if residues and pollutants do not enter the cycles in the first place and cannot accumulate there. It is therefore important to systematically prevent residues from being produced in the first place, e.g. using electrophysical processes.

Lukie Pieterse writes: „The ability to respond to shifting consumer demands, adapt to changing trade policies, and build resilient supply chains will be critical in maintaining the industry’s competitive edge.“

crop.zone in Vision 2050: The world will also grow together in terms of its demands on food production. As a result, it will become less and less possible to use herbicides in certain regions that are already banned in other parts of the world for good reasons. This applies in particular to non-selective herbicides, some of which are highly toxic, which crop.zone is replacing with electricity. At the same time, resilient supply chains also require a secure supply capability despite changing weather and climate conditions. Dispensing with siccation or other crop protection methods or returning to ploughing are therefore not options, as they reduce the resilience of the soil and the entire production system.

Especially with the desired global expansion of the organic potato market, it will be necessary to harvest the potatoes on time and firm in their skins in order to be able to deliver them to the supermarkets packed in bags and also to avoid food losses due to rotting. This will only work on a large production scale with crop.zone as a non-chemical siccation process with a wide range of applications.

New and innovative modes of action, such as electricity, will generally be required to maintain current supply chains, which are also threatened by increasingly resistant weeds.

Lukie Pieterse writes: “Empowering smallholders and promoting social equity will be key components of the industry’s vision for 2050.”

crop.zone in Vision 2050: The trend towards sharing innovative technology will spread worldwide. Small farmers in particular are often unable to afford innovative technology on their own, even if it could make cultivation significantly more environmentally friendly. At the same time, they and their neighbours are particularly and directly at risk from the use of highly toxic, non-selective herbicides. The lack of qualified labour and increasing environmental regulations show that even medium-sized farmers (which means something completely different in various regions of the world) can only survive if they use highly innovative technologies. There will only be social and economic justice in open trading systems if everyone avoids residues at the same high level and produces in an environmentally friendly way. To this end, crop.zone is making its contribution on the agricultural technology side in the area of residue-free crop cultivation for farmers of all sizes.

Lukie Pieterse writes: „Finally, the industry must prioritize ethical sourcing and supply chain transparency, responding to growing consumer demand for products that are produced sustainably and ethically.“

crop.zone in the Vision 2050: Especially when consumers can obtain more and more information directly or via dynamically customised quality seals thanks to blockchain, they will increasingly demand compliance with high and obviously feasible standards. The pressure will then also come from potato processors and their legal protection insurers against consumer complaints. If potato siccation without chemical residues in the environment is feasible and well documented, it will have to be implemented on a broad basis. At the same time, the transparency of supply chains down to the last detail also offers farmers, for example, the opportunity to show that they can grow potatoes and at the same time provide excellent protection for the soil. The farmer who then has 150-250 earthworms per square metre in his potato fields thanks to very good care, including compost and green manure, should then receive more for his product. However, this will also exert market-driven pressure on those who have so far been content with 40 earthworms or less or have ignored this parameter altogether.

It will also be even less explainable ethically why in some countries agricultural workers still work with herbicides that have a skull and crossbones on the packaging or can cause permanent damage to the young, while these have often been banned for the same crop in other parts of the world for decades. In the area of non-selective, highly toxic herbicides, e.g. in potato desiccation, but also far beyond this, crop.zone can offer ethically acceptable alternatives worldwide. 

Lukie Pieterse writes: „By embracing innovation, sustainability, and collaboration, the potato industry can not only meet the demands of a rapidly changing world but also lead the way in creating a more equitable and prosperous future for all.“

In recent years, potato farming has experienced a transformation, driven by both regulatory changes and consumer demand for more sustainable agricultural practices. One of the key processes in potato production – desiccation – has traditionally relied on chemical herbicides to kill off the potato haulm before harvesting. However, with increasing restrictions on chemical plant protection products and a growing emphasis on environmental responsibility, the future of potato desiccation lies in innovative and sustainable solutions.

At the forefront of this change is crop.zone, whose unique hybrid electric desiccation technology offers a promising alternative to chemical desiccation methods. In this blog, we will explore how sustainable potato desiccation is reshaping the industry, and why professional farmers should consider making the switch to this greener technology.

Dessiccation is crucial for an effective potato harvest. Killing the weeds before harvest allows the tubers to mature, improves skin formation and reduces the risk of disease and potato storage problems. Traditional chemical siccation methods using the herbicide diquat have proven to be very effective, but are now banned in Europe due to the substance’s high toxicity to humans on tractors and in the field. The substitutes work only in combination with sunlight, are generally slower, usually require multiple applications, and are less effective. However, as the use of chemicals is increasingly restricted in Europe, farmers need a reliable and environmentally friendly alternative.

In light of these challenges, farmers have been looking for a more efficient, reliable, and sustainable solution that not only complies with regulations but also meets the environmental expectations of modern consumers.

crop.zone’s hybrid-electric desiccation system represents a new frontier in potato desiccation. By combining electrical energy with a pre-treatment that increases conductivity, this technology disrupts the plant’s cell structure, effectively drying the haulm without the use of chemicals. This solution not only provides effective desiccation, but also meets the growing demand for environmentally friendly farming practices.

The benefits of crop.zone go beyond compliance. As agriculture becomes increasingly focused on sustainable production, methods such as electric dessiccation offer growers a way to reduce their environmental footprint while maintaining or even improving crop quality and safety.

This approach ensures that potatoes remain undamaged and free of chemical residues, which is increasingly important to both processors and consumers who demand high-quality, residue-free produce.

As chemical desiccants for other crops become less or no longer viable, the need for innovative, sustainable desiccation methods increases. crop.zone’s electric desiccation technology offers professional growers a way to future-proof their operations while contributing to a more sustainable agricultural system. Moving to environmentally friendly technology is not just an option, but a necessity for potato growers and beyond who want to be competitive and innovative in producing safe and healthy food on healthy fields.

Minimising food waste from the field to the table (Farm to Fork)

From 29 September 2024, the ‘Too good for the bin!’ campaign week of the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) will take place in Germany. There are similar campaigns in Austria, ), Switzerland, France, Italy, England, Spain, and Sweden for example.

It is good to know that yoghurt does not immediately become inedible after the best-before date and that seeing, smelling and tasting is the better choice. However, it is often enough to show respect for the vegetables and everything that goes into them: Labour, love, energy, carbon footprint (or whatever your favourite motivation is).

However, food does not just end up in the bin at the point of consumption. Many decisions for and supposedly in the consumer’s interest have already been made beforehand. Potatoes that are too big or too small or crooked carrots are not even sold in supermarkets (many shops in Switzerland, for example, show that there are other ways of doing things). Apples were and are also knocked off the trees or sorted out because they are not all the same size – the more sustainable consumer therefore now buys apples in bags per kg. Broccoli are fattened with lots of fertiliser, regardless of the weather and season, until they weigh exactly what the supermarket demands per piece and uniformly for everyone. This is harmful to the environment and, if worse luck has it, a lot of broccoli ends up in the biogas plant because the supermarket didn’t buy it in the first place. However, supermarket chains can use scales and digital tools to quickly change prices.

In all these cases, it makes sense to make a clear personal and social statement and call on supermarkets to stop making such questionable quality claims. In other cases, it is not the fault of the EU, but that of the packaging industry, which just wanted cucumbers to fit better in the crates.

This is why processes such as potato desiccation have been developed, which stop the growth of potatoes in the field depending on the weather, potato size, starch content and required delivery date for further processing. Twining due to recurring wetness and further growth of the formerly compact tuber is also prevented.  Hardly anyone likes waxy potato varieties, which tend to taste mealy due to a high starch content (too much sun for too long).

What used to be done with highly toxic chemicals (for the spraying farmer and the dog owner out for a walk, not for the potato eater) can now only be done less effectively with substances that need sunlight to be effective. However, this is not always sufficiently available at harvest time and certainly cannot be planned – especially not in times of climate change.

Or it is now being sicced completely without herbicides.

That’s why crop.zone has created an innovation with electrophysical desiccation, in which the cells in the potato haulm are destroyed without chemical herbicides to such an extent that the haulm dries out and the potatoes no longer grow – and are given a stable skin.

In this way, crop.zone makes a contribution to a safe and high-quality harvest and against food waste. An important step in the value chain from farm to fork (farm to fork).

Then it’s the consumers’ turn. They enjoy the potatoes – and the remaining potatoes are turned into a nice portion of roast potatoes. Because they are far too good for the bin. And if they were jacket potatoes, the loss through the peel is minimal.

Bon appétit…

The herbicide DCPA (also known as Dachtal) has so far mainly been used on vegetables such as broccoli and onions in the USA and elsewhere. It can cause damage even before birth, from which people suffer for the rest of their lives. There has been no such herbicide ban as an emergency procedure in the USA for 40 years. (EPA bans DCPA pesticide Dachtal weedkiller)

In the EU, the ban was 15 years faster in a regular process. The herbicide was no longer authorised here in 2009.

This means that pregnant agricultural workers in particular have not had to risk the lives of their children for 15 years.

It can therefore be said that even in a highly industrialised country with first-class science, the approval of a plant protection product is no guarantee that the plant protection products approved there are safe.

Those who take the precautionary principle seriously will recognise dangers earlier and ban many substances earlier for good rational and scientific reasons – and continue to use other substances responsibly.

The example also illustrates that importing food from other countries with lower standards is unfair and economically damaging for German/European farmers. Those who are allowed to use cheap and toxic herbicides do not have to price in more environmentally friendly and more expensive methods. This does not change the fact that this would make sense in many cases for environmental and health reasons and would save society as a whole a great deal of money. Citizens should actually be able to rely on the fact that the health risk of food for themselves, for the farmers and for the environment does not depend on the country of origin.

If other countries attach less importance to health, in some cases only import bans will help as a first step.

However, here in Germany and in the EU, we not only want to enjoy healthily grown food, but also affordable and readily available food from the EU and other countries.

That is why we in the EU and especially in Germany, and also with regard to the international export of technology, must constructively create new processes for better and more cost-effective crop protection. This is the only way that we can continue to provide safe crop protection in agriculture under increasingly uncertain weather conditions and work so economically that we can sell both the food and the crop protection technologies. If modern processes are used internationally, we can also import products that have been produced under good conditions at fair prices. At least then there will be no more dumping in terms of health and environmental standards.

We must actively utilise and expand this lead in responsible action in plant protection in order to generate benefits for everyone – not just for pregnant women who no longer have to put their children at risk. This means that the precautionary principle in the EU must be applied consistently and on a sound and comprehensive factual basis for all methods of plant protection. This has obviously worked with DCPA. It was not authorised as early as 2009. 

In the risk assessment of glyphosate, too, there are currently serious indications that the precautionary principle may not have played the role in the latest scientific and legal assessments that the EU legislator demanded and that corresponds to the facts of the case. The EU has also determined that the quality of the ecotoxicological data is insufficient for an appropriate assessment.

The EU must now continue to work on this consistently and responsibly. Only in this way can risks to humans and the environment be avoided against better judgement, in the knowledge of major gaps in knowledge and against the EU’s own standards.

Anyone who bans the very targeted use of insecticides in seed coating and pelleting for precautionary reasons must clearly analyse and weigh up whether the large-scale application of similar insecticides in the fields is really the more environmentally friendly method. There must always be a comparison of similar effective and available methods.

Emergency authorisations in individual EU countries, which turn out to be illegal years later but have given farmers in individual countries an advantage in a free market, are not an alternative. Fairness is only possible if there are better alternative methods and not if one simply hopes that it will work without the measure. If this were the case, farmers would do without a lot of crop protection.

The precautionary principle applies to the environment, to people’s health, but also to the economic viability of agriculture. There will always have to be trade-offs. However, legal and political decisions will have to shift if the risks are greater than previously estimated and technical alternatives become simpler and more efficient.

It is also not purposeful, for example, to simply return to cultivating and ploughing to reduce the use of glyphosate in cover crop and weed control, with all the undesirable side effects for humus, soil structure of many soils, soil life, erosion and energy consumption. Here, too, it is important to look ahead to new, better methods and not to return defensively to methods that have been replaced by glyphosate for good reasons.

Neither hoping for the future, nor leaving things out, nor going back to old methods are solutions. Realistic and effective methods to solve the real problems in the fields are needed.

crop.zone is doing its part and working on sustainable methods of crop management without chemical herbicides, including for cover crops and weeds (= wrong plant in the wrong place at the wrong time in too large a quantity), so that farmers and legislators have more innovative solutions at their disposal as economic alternatives. After all, crop protection and plant control always take place in the field and need technological progress there.

Prolonged rainfall alternating with high temperatures provides ideal growth conditions for plant pathogenic fungi – including the late blight pathogen P. infestans. The German Farmers’ Association and the Association of the German Potato Industry have warned that the risk of massive outbreaks of late blight is higher than it has been for a long time and could jeopardise the supply of potatoes and the potato value chain.

Along with rice, maize and wheat, the potato is now one of the world’s most important staple foods. In Germany, the area under potato cultivation was around 262,600 ha in 2023 (Federal Statistical Office, 2024).

An integrated approach to crop protection, including preventive strategies such as cultural practices and variety selection, and the use of fungicides in a spraying sequence adapted to forecasting systems, is essential to control the disease. In conventional agriculture, the range of fungicidal active ingredients is already severely restricted; mancozeb, for example, will no longer be registered after 2022, and other active ingredients are expected to be phased out over the next few years. In line with the strict requirements of organic farming, the only effective direct control, in addition to preventative measures, is copper preparations. Due to their potentially harmful effects on soil, soil organisms and water, the use of these agents has been restricted to 3 kg ha-1 of pure copper within the German growers’ associations and is repeatedly the subject of controversy. The search for environmentally friendly biological products to directly control late blight has been ongoing for many years.

However, the adaptable pathogen quickly develops resistance to fungicides, new strains become more aggressive in their spread and can overcome existing resistance genes in potato varieties. As a result, some of the most effective tools for managing late blight are being lost.

The high disease pressure caused by late blight in the 2024 season is a major challenge for growers. Forward-looking strategies to control Phytophthora require a combination of preventative measures such as monitoring and crop management, as well as effective fungicidal crop protection products and resistant potato varieties. Our growers are committed to using all the tools at their disposal to best protect their crops each season.

Glyphosate is a synthetic chemical. In its pure form, it consists of five elements: carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, and phosphorus. The first four elements – carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen and oxygen – are currently brought into the correct form using a great deal of fossil raw materials and energy, but can also be produced sustainably using renewable electricity from virtually unlimited raw materials.

The production of phosphorus is not only energy intensive, but also limited because phosphorus can only be mined in a few specific locations. The extraction of phosphorus poses significant problems:

This article shows just how devastating the current situation in Western Sahara is: Dispute over the status of Western Sahara.

After mining, the phosphate rock is crushed. To obtain the white phosphorus needed, the rock is heated to 1500 degrees Celsius together with coke and silicon dioxide. This process produces a considerable amount of carbon monoxide and consumes a lot of energy. The white phosphorus is then purified and can be processed further to produce glyphosate. 

Known phosphate reserves are estimated to last 100 to 300 years, although there are reports that the reserves could last as little as 80 years. Unlike other fossil resources such as coal and oil, which can be replaced by alternative energy sources, phosphorus is indispensable and irreplaceable as a nutrient for plants, an ingredient in animal feed, and a critical element for humans, particularly in bones.

Phosphate must be used sparingly. In addition, phosphate bound in the soil must be made available again. An important step towards better cycles and less use of phosphorus from deposits is the use of green fertilizers, which make phosphorus available again for animals and plants.

But we can restore it regeneratively – with many advantages

For over 7000 years, long before the discovery of the brown coal, humans have been exploiting soils and forests non-regeneratively and releasing additional CO₂ as part of the carbonisation strategy. Through ever better and deeper ploughing, the quasi-fossil nutrients (especially nitrogen) in the humus were released and the humus content in many soils was reduced from an average of 3 % to around 1.5 %. For a long time, this provided a lot of fertiliser to feed mankind, but is now reaching its limits. Many soils have already been irreversibly damaged, but even more soils are now in great need of regenerative cultivation.

At 2.1 billion tonnes of CO₂ per year, agricultural soils are the second largest source of CO₂ emissions from agriculture, just behind deforestation.

As part of the generally necessary decarbonisation of all sectors, not only must nitrogenous fertilisers now be produced from green electricity/hydrogen instead of coal and natural gas, but the soil must also be rebuilt and at least partially fertilised with regeneratively produced humus. This is exactly what regenerative agriculture does with cover crops and usually greatly reduced tillage.

Soils are a wealth and must be cared for. However, they also offer a great opportunity to make an important positive contribution to the regenerative storage of CO₂. This is because we can no longer get the burnt brown coal back into the open-cast mines.

Arable land stores over 140 billion tonnes of carbon in the top 30 cm of soil. Through practices such as tillage, an estimated 78 billion tonnes of soil organic carbon (SOC) have been lost since the industrial revolution, equivalent to 286 billion tonnes of CO₂. (Carbon in Cropland Soils) For comparison, annual global CO₂ emissions 38 billion tonnes of CO₂ (Broken Record Temperatures hit new highs, yet world fails to cut emissions (again))

Studies show that consistent cultivation of cover crops, where feasible in combination with direct sowing, can turn the soils of CO₂ emitters into carbon sinks. CO₂ is then additionally removed from the atmosphere using regenerative energy from sunlight. (When does soil carbon contribute to climate change mitigation?)

Increasing the organic carbon content in soils by 0.27% to 0.54% in the top 30 cm of the world’s cultivated areas could sequester 0.90 to 1.85 billion tonnes of carbon annually for at least 20 years. This corresponds to 3.3 to 6.8 billion tonnes of CO₂ per year. (The international “4 per 1000” Initiative)

The intensive use of green manure and direct sowing plays an important role here. It can bind 0.7 to 1.6 billion tonnes of CO₂ per year on up to 25 % of the world’s cultivated areas. (Climate Change and Land) For comparison: Emissions from road transport in Europe in 2022 0.74 billion tonnes of CO₂ (Straßenverkehr: EU-weite CO₂-Emissionen seit 1990 um 21 % gestiegen)

However, like any investment in the future, the soil and the humus in it must be well cared for. That is why a return to the plough is not an option. Depending on soil type and cultivation, soils have a binding potential of 1 to 4 tonnes of CO₂/ha per year. However, a single ploughing of a no-till field can release up to 10 t CO₂/ha and thus destroy the storage effort of many years. (Loss of soil organic matter upon ploughing under a loess soil after several years of conservation tillage)

This example shows the importance of efficient plant control without ploughing and with minimised soil movement. Furthermore, ploughing/tillage is the most energy-intensive agricultural practice (with the exception of flaming in organic farming).

In order to decarbonise agriculture and make it an active climate improver in cultivated landscapes, some major changes will be necessary, but many farmers have already begun to make them. The side effects not only of ploughing but also of glyphosate for soil life, biodiversity and general health will always have to be considered.

Farmers need new methods to meet the rapidly growing demands of climate protection and biodiversity. At the same time, they must always provide the world’s food supply, regenerative organic raw materials and also some fun with the luxury foods and drinks. As part of sustainable agricultural technology innovation, crop.zone supports farmers with food production as well as the Green Deal with society. Because we need both – without compromise.

Nitrous oxide or “laughing gas” is the most harmful greenhouse gas after CO₂ and methane. Agriculture is the largest source from fertilisers and animal production. The good news for the performance of European agriculture: nitrous oxide emissions from agriculture have been stagnating in Germany and Europe for around 20 years because fertiliser efficiency has increased. The bad news is that fertiliser efficiency worldwide is much worse than in Europe and nitrous oxide emissions are continuing to rise. But even in Germany and Europe, nitrogen efficiency can still be increased significantly, because so far only 50-60% of the fertiliser actually reaches the plant. (Agriculture ‘major driver’ of rise in nitrous oxide emissions over past 40 years)

Better fertiliser management and additives such as nitrification inhibitors can help a lot more to ensure that the fertiliser reaches the plant and is not converted to nitrous oxide by bacteria beforehand.(A round-up of enhanced urea fertilisers and additives) Simply saving fertiliser because of the sometimes high prices does not increase efficiency and reduces the yield.

The fact that the price of synthetic fertiliser is falling again and there is no longer a shortage sounds good at first. However, this is ultimately due to the dumping prices of Russian nitrogen fertiliser, which is increasingly threatening European fertiliser production. (Shifting Market Landscape)

At the end of the day, nitrogen fertiliser is nothing more than converted natural gas or the hydrogen from natural gas. This is a problem if we become dependent on Russian fertiliser again instead of Russian natural gas. This imported fertiliser is much more harmful to the climate than the fertiliser currently produced in Western Europe because it has a much larger CO₂ footprint (Carbon Footprinting in Fertilizer Production) Just as with agricultural products themselves, high environmental standards and fair production opportunities can only be achieved through a very clear import policy with high standards without dumping

Hydrogen as such is also an opportunity, however, because hydrogen can also be produced from renewable electricity instead of fossil gas – and can also be stored excellently as liquid ammonia or solid synthetic fertiliser (15 things you need to know about hydrogen). Intensive work is being carried out on further options for producing ammonia and nitrogen fertiliser directly from electricity and atmospheric nitrogen (Green fertilizers could revolutionize agriculture and increase food security and Fertilizing with wind).

As always, individual technical modules are important and necessary, but must also be thought through to the end. For example, green hydrogen or electricity alone will not solve the fertiliser challenge in Europe or worldwide (Making international trade in green hydrogen fair and sustainable). Ultimately, the the atmosphere does not care whether the nitrous oxide was produced from natural gas or green electricity. Fertiliser efficiency and soil health also depend very much on the cultivation method and the local, fully organic fertilisers that can be produced from sunlight using regenerative methods to improve the soil: cover crops.

A lot has already been achieved, but far too often you still see open soil in times of warmth and sufficient sunshine. Nobody would simply switch off their solar system for months on end in conditions like these. Fields often still have considerable photosynthesis potential that can be utilised through interseeding, undersowing and other innovative and precision cultivation concepts (The Case for Regenerative Agriculture in Germany—and Beyond). This will always be an interplay of agricultural technology, plants, optimised nutrient supply and clever and precise field cultivation (Regenerative agriculture).

The only thing that will certainly not occur in this climate-friendly precision agriculture with less nitrous oxide and more fertiliser efficiency are fixed calendar dates and undifferentiable large-scale rules that can be pressed into simple forms. Diversity needs flexibility with clear goals and also clear and simple measurements of performance and success. A great deal of innovation will be needed here too.

As with chemical treatment, no soil needs to be moved by ploughing or cultivating, so that no additional water evaporates, no humus is mineralised and soil life is not disrupted. crop.zone is also working on system solutions for the cultivation of legumes and, where necessary, their siccation. In this way, we also support regenerative nitrogen fixation from the air as a fertiliser. Together, we must develop methods to reconcile economic viability, food security, fair access to soils, climate protection and biodiversity. This is not easy, but there is no alternative. What we postpone now will be all the more difficult later. Or the development time will be too short for increasingly urgent solutions. We will need the Green Deal in terms of content, regardless of the political name of the concept. We can only discuss the most efficient design and turn it into good concepts as quickly as possible, which will then serve as a guideline for politics and society.

12,000 years ago, humans first began to cultivate plants – the beginning of modern agriculture. Today, agriculture faces challenges such as climate and nature conservation, population growth and the increasing demand for sustainable and nutritious products. Modern agricultural research examines these challenges and develops new technologies, methods and products to meet them.

Field trials are an essential part of modern agricultural research. They are conducted under practical conditions to collect representative data. They can be used to test hypotheses, gain new knowledge and draw informed conclusions.

The advantages of field experiments are that they are highly valid because they are carried out under real conditions and the results are often more transferable to real situations than laboratory experiments. They also have a high degree of practical relevance, as the knowledge gained can be used directly to solve practical problems and make informed decisions. However, there are challenges associated with field trials. One of these is controllability, as it is difficult to keep track of all the influencing factors. The natural variability of the environment can make it difficult to identify clear cause-and-effect relationships and interpret results. In addition, field trials are often costly and logistically challenging, especially when conducted over long periods of time.

This basic idea is worked out together, hypotheses are formulated and an experimental plan is developed that should be of use to all departments. Once a suitable field is found or has been found and the conditions are right, the practical part of the experiments begins. These are carried out according to biostatistical principles, i.e. the experimental elements are repeated several times and randomly distributed over the area, and the experiments are repeated under different conditions whenever possible. The trials are closely monitored by technicians and machine data, such as electrical data, is fed directly into the farm’s own database. Before, during and after the treatment, the biology department regularly assesses plant populations using drone and imagery surveys, assessments and sampling. These observations are documented in a special field trial application. Once all the observations have been made, the data is processed and analysed together to understand the complexities and develop our work.

The range of trials carried out by and with crop.zone is very broad and includes different types of trials:

The results of our agronomic research and field trials form the basis of our management recommendations for a sustainable future.

When it comes to yields and what influences them, farmers are very knowledgeable. They know their fields, their varieties, the crop protection products, the weather, current plant diseases and much more. And at the end of each year, they can see from the yield for each field whether their own judgement and actions were appropriate given the unchangeable circumstances. This creates local precision experience for the yields and the chance to do at least as well or even better in the future.

When it comes to biodiversity and environmental impact, however, the empirical situation is much worse. Even for plant protection products such as glyphosate, which have been used for decades, European expert committees have found that a clear ecotoxicological risk assessment is still not possible (Glyphosate: no critical areas of concern; data gaps identified). Insecticides that were previously used very selectively in the pelleting of seeds have been banned there, but the widespread, indiscriminate spraying of almost the same insecticides on entire fields has been permitted again, at least as an emergency solution and also in different ways depending on the EU country. The farmer’s understanding and detailed local knowledge of how to optimise biodiversity and environmental impact just as effectively as yield quickly fails.

But the reality is different. Instead of targeted determinations of when and where exactly too much nitrate gets into the groundwater and what today’s fertilisation will mean for the groundwater in 20 years’ time, there are large red zones. They make no distinction between farmers who have used fertilisers responsibly for decades and others who have often maximised yields according to fertiliser specifications.  Many of the measures for eco-points or other environmental services that must be provided by the farmer or lead to compensation payments change at short intervals, differ from country to country (which leads to economic injustice), are hardly comprehensible from an agronomic point of view and are linked to calendar dates, for example. Especially in times of climate change and extremely fluctuating weather conditions, it should be clear that this type of rule-based micromanagement does not help to protect the environment. Nobody would think of telling a farmer by deadline when to plant potatoes, apply crop protection or harvest. At the same time, this multitude of regulations also creates mountains of bureaucracy (which should actually be reduced), forcing the farmer to sit at a desk instead of being able to look after the fields in a sensible way.

How can we get out of this situation? Here are a few suggestions that are certainly not the only solution, but can provide an impetus as to which direction it makes sense to go in.

Micromanagement with centralised rules and data in a rapidly changing environment will never do justice to a highly diverse system like agriculture – and even less so in the future.

The aim must be more personal responsibility and individual action on the part of farmers, because biodiversity and soil health – just like yield – are created in every single field.

In order for farmers to assume more personal responsibility, they must be able to assess the effects of their actions as well as possible. This also applies to environmental protection and, for example, soil health. There are extremely large deficits here. Even for known herbicides (see above), the effects on insects are still frighteningly unclear. The risk assessment for insecticides is often not much better.  Here too, the effects of individual PPPs are more complex and, for example, temperature-dependent (DE: Major challenges for small soil organisms Drought and high temperatures make fungicides more toxic) or there are previously unexpected effects in deeper soil layers without large product concentrations (DE: Assessment of the risk to soil organisms under real conditions).

Consequently, in many cases even the general patterns of impact are unclear and even less so the specific local effects. There will still be many surprises – if we were to measure them.

This brings us to one of the key challenges. There is no precision ecotoxicology and precision ecology. But that is exactly what we need for biodiversity and soil health as part of precision agriculture, as well as for field cultivation and yield. Precision does not mean measuring or knowing EVERYTHING, but using effective tools to achieve the best possible information at the lowest possible cost. A GPS of biodiversity and environmental protection would be ideal.

crop.zone, although not a chemical plant protection product, has nevertheless carried out extensive studies on its influence on earthworms, springtails, soil mites and soil bacteria during electrophysical siccation. No influence was found. Farmers also need reliable general data on the effects of ploughing, tilling, cultivating and other methods on soil life on soils that are at least similar to their own for optimisation purposes. It is known that ploughing and large-scale soil movement through potato cultivation and sugar beet, for example, can reduce the number of earthworms by up to 50 %. Nevertheless, there are farmers who, thanks to decades of soil care, have 50 to 200 earthworms per square metre without any problems, even with potatoes and sugar beet in the crop rotation.

crop.zone ist zwar kein chemisches Pflanzenschutzmittel, hat aber dennoch umfangreiche Studien über seinen Einfluss auf Regenwürmer, Springschwänze, Bodenmilben und Bodenbakterien während der elektrophysikalischen Sikkation durchgeführt. Es wurde kein Einfluss festgestellt. Auch die Landwirte benötigen zur Optimierung verlässliche allgemeine Daten über die Auswirkungen von Pflügen, Bodenbearbeitung, Kultivierung und anderen Methoden auf das Bodenleben auf Böden, die ihren eigenen zumindest ähnlich sind. Es ist bekannt, dass das Pflügen und die großflächige Bodenbewegung durch z. B. Kartoffelanbau und Zuckerrüben die Anzahl der Regenwürmer um bis zu 50 % reduzieren kann. Dennoch gibt es Landwirte, die dank jahrzehntelanger Bodenpflege auch bei Kartoffeln und Zuckerrüben in der Fruchtfolge problemlos 50 bis 200 Regenwürmer pro Quadratmeter haben.

This shows that, just as with yield, we also need simple but highly meaningful measurement parameters in ecotoxicology and environmental assessment that provide every farmer with annual feedback. Digging in the field with a spade more often is certainly helpful and recommended (Video: New video on the spade test). In the future, however, even more objective methods for measuring biodiversity in the field, for example, will become increasingly important for monitoring success and payments for social added value. The DLG is also working on researching such methods (DE: BioMonitor4CAP: EU biodiversity monitoring project launched) and evaluating measures (DE: Strengthening species diversity and biodiversity in arable farming).

Only if precision agriculture also includes precision ecotoxicology can it take account of the high diversity of individual fields, local conditions and climate change, including biodiversity. Targeted action by farmers requires the best possible information about the effects of the methods in general and also about the specific effects on their own fields. Data alone will not help here, but artificial intelligence as an advisor for utilising shared experience and good simulation models will certainly provide a great deal of support, just as they do for weather forecasting. This can be an important contribution to less bureaucratic, less rule-based environmental protection and more reality-based, concrete action for the benefit of biodiversity. crop.zone supports this with its own ecotox tests and the development of crop control methods without chemical agents and soil movement. Innovation for the benefit of agriculture and society as a whole needs more meaningful and highly efficient environmental information, including for local field conditions. After all, biodiversity is generated on the individual field just as much as yield.