Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T21:18:57.348Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Subsurface Drip Irrigation Versus Center-Pivot Sprinkler for Applying Swine Effluent to Corn

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 April 2015

R.I. Carreira
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR
A.L. Stoecker
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
F.M. Epplin
Affiliation:
Department of Agricultural Economics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
J.A. Hattey
Affiliation:
Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
M.A. Kizer
Affiliation:
Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK

Abstract

A risk-averse irrigated corn producer would be better off choosing the more expensive subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) over center-pivot sprinkler (CPS), given limited aquifer life and swine effluent and urea fertilization. A stochastic optimization using EPIC data maximized expected utility of 100 years' worth of net revenues for a quarter section. Phosphorus accumulation was more likely with the CPS than with the SDI but soil nitrogen was constant under both systems. SDI conserves more water than CPS per acre but depletes the aquifer faster because a greater area is irrigated. These results were invariant in the sensitivity analysis.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Southern Agricultural Economics Association 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bierman, H., and Smidt, S.. The Capital Budgeting Decision: Economic Analysis of Investment Projects, 8th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1993.Google Scholar
Bostwick, D.Yield Probabilities as a Markov Process.Agricultural Economics Research, 14(1962): 4958.Google Scholar
Camp, C.R.Subsurface Drip Irrigation: A Review.Transactions of the ASAE 41 (July 1998): 1353-67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carreira, R.I.Economic Study of Alternative Best Management Practices for Swine Effluent Application to Corn in Semiarid Climate.” Ph.D. Dissertation, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, December 2004.Google Scholar
Dumler, T.J., and Rogers, D.H.. Irrigation Capital Requirements and Energy Costs. Manhattan, KS: Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, Kansas State University, Technical Bulletin No. MF 836. Internet site: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/library/agec2/mf836.pdf (Accessed May 31, 2005).Google Scholar
Forster, D.L.Economic Issues in Animal Waste Management.” Animal Waste Utilization–Effective Use of Manure as a Soil Resource. Hatfield, J.L. and Stewart, B.A., eds. Chelsea: Ann Arbor Press, 1998.Google Scholar
Froese, C.Water Usage and Manure Production Rates in Today's Pig Industry.Advances in Pork Production, 14(2003): 215-23.Google Scholar
Gray, A.W., Boehlje, M.D., Gloy, B.A., and Slinsky, S.P.. “How U.S. Farm Programs and Crop Insurance Affect Returns to Farm Land.Review of Agricultural Economics, 26(June 2004): 238-53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hattey, J.A. Personal communication, Department of Plant and Soil Sciences, Oklahoma State University, 2003.Google Scholar
Hillier, F.S., and Lieberman, G.J.. Introduction to Operations Research, 3rd ed. San Francisco: Holden-Day, 1980.Google Scholar
Hinton, M.Hog Bill Called Nation's Strictest: Keating Hails Success; Swine Farmers CriticizeThe Daily Oklahoman, June 11, 1998, City ed. Sec News p. 1.Google Scholar
Just, R.E., and Pope, R.D.. “Agricultural Risk Analysis: Adequacy of Models, Data, and IssuesAmerican Journal of Agricultural Economics 85(December 2003): 1249-56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kizer, M.A. Personal communication, Department of Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering, Oklahoma State University, 2003.Google Scholar
Kromm, D.E., and White, S.E.. “Groundwater Problems.” Groundwater Exploitation in the High Plains. Kromm, D.E. and White, S.E., eds. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamm, F.R., Trooien, T.P., Stone, L.R., Alam, M., Rogers, D.H., Clark, G.A., and Schlegel, A.J.. “Using Livestock Wastewater with SDI–A Status Report After Four Seasons.” Central Plains Irrigation Short Course Proceedings, Lamar, 2002, pp. 815.Google Scholar
Levary, R.R., and Seitz, N.E.. Quantitative Methods for Capital Budgeting. Cincinnati, OH: Southwestern Publishing, 1990.Google Scholar
Martin, H.Kansas Farmers Look Forward to First SDI Corn CropHigh Plains Journal, September 8, 2003.Google Scholar
Moffitt, L.J.Characterizing Uncertain Outcomes with the Restricted HT Transformation.Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 34(December 2002):417-29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, D.M., Rogers, D.H., Lamm, E.R., and Clark, G.. “Economic Comparison of SDI and Center Pivots for Various Field Sizes.” Manhattan, KS: Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, Kansas State University Technical Bulletin No. MF 2242. Internet site: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/library/ageng2/mf2242.pdf (Accessed September 12, 2003).Google Scholar
O'Brien, D.M., Rogers, D.H., Lamm, E.R., and Clark, G.. “An Economic Comparison of Subsurface Drip and Center Pivot Sprinkler Irrigation Systems.Applied Engineering in Agriculture, 14(July 1998):391-98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phene, C.J., and Phene, R.C.. “Drip Irrigation Systems and Management,Food and Fertilizer Technology Center Extension Bulletin 244(January 1987): 124.Google Scholar
Ribaudo, M., Gollehon, N., Aillery, M., Kaplan, J., Johansson, R., Agapoff, J., Christensen, L., Breneman, V., and Peters, M.. “Manure Management for Water Quality: Costs to Animal Feeding Operations of Applying Manure Nutrients to Land.” Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture-Economic Research Service, Resource Economics Division, Agricultural Economic Report No. 824, 2003.Google Scholar
Saghaian, S., Dillon, C., and Salim, J.. “Comparison of Decision Rules for Subsurface Drip Irrigation Practices Using a Nonlinear Mathematical Programming Model.” Paper presented at the Southern Agricultural Economics Annual Meetings, Little Rock, February 5-9, 2005.Google Scholar
Sharpley, A.N., Carter, B.J., Wagner, B.J., Smith, S.J., Cole, E.L., and Sample, G.A.. “Impact of Long-Term Swine and Poultry Manure Application on Soil and Water Resources in Eastern Oklahoma.” Stillwater, OK: Agricultural Experimental Station, Oklahoma State University, Technical Bulletin No. T-169, 1991.Google Scholar
Sweeten, J.Miner, R., and Tengman, C.. “Fact Sheet #1: A Brief History and Background of the EPA CAFO Rule.CAFO Fact Sheet Series, 1(July 2003).Google Scholar
Taylor, C.R.Flexible Method for Empirically Estimating Probability Functions.Western Journal of Agricultural Economics, 9(July 1984): 6676.Google Scholar
Tyson, T.W.Sizing Swine Lagoons For Odor Control. Auburn, AL: Alabama Cooperative Extension System, Auburn University Technical Bulletin No. ANR-1090, 1998.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture-Economic Research Service (USDA-ERS). “1996 FAIR Act Frames Farm Policy for 7 Years.” Agricultural Outlook Supplement, April 1996.Google Scholar
U.S. Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS). Census of Agriculture. 1997 and 2002.Google Scholar
Zhang, H., and McCray, B.. “Oklahoma Agriculture Soil Test Summary 2002-2003.” Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Fact Sheets, Oklahoma State University. Internet site: http://www.osuextra.com (Accessed September 27, 2005).Google Scholar
Zhang, H., and Hamilton, D.W.. “Using Lagoon Effluent as Fertilizer.” Stillwater, OK: Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Fact Sheets, Oklahoma State University. Internet site: http://www.osuextra.com (Accessed September 27, 2005).Google Scholar