I seem to remember that cotton farmers in Qld were getting 70% efficiency through flood irrigation (I was doing research at the time and came across a Co-op Research mob's papers)... which meant that it competed on underground drip irrigation very, very well... at the time.Quote:
Flood irrigation seems such a dumb dumb idea.
At the time, sub-surface drip systems were achieving 98% efficiency, surface drippers 90% and overhead irrigation was @ 70 - 80%.
The trouble was that underground systems require very significant 'per Ha' installation investment, and at the time were delivering up to 15% per Ha yield loss!
A 15% yield loss for some of the most competitive farmers in the world, in a totally unsubsidised production market, meant that you'd install sub-surface drippers and then go broke in 2 years. :oo:
Of course you could just by cotton produced eleswhere... heavily subsidised and which isn't really competitive and is very 'environmentally unfriendly'.
Hell, some Latin/South American cotton producers pay so little the workers have to garden, after hours, to be able to eat!
Now the complexities of underground drip systems are being slowly worked out and it seems to be out competing furrow flood in most cases... both in amount applied per hectare (the easy bit) and in yields per hectare (the difficult part).
Simply put, the new technology had to be integrated into the farming system and had to be studied carefully to work out how to actually make it cost effective and produce better yields.
Funnily enough, continued research into flood irrigation has meant that 'best practice' gets flood irrigation to 98% (and higher) efficiency. :rolleyes:
Next step is to conquer the issue of 'on farm storage evaporation' in a cost effective way.
So, my mate banana farmer near Tully (like all farmers) will be scratching his head and doing the sums to reduce the bore pump running time and if that means he converts to buried trickle tape over the existing combination "on ground micro sprinklers and drippers" then he will.
However the information for this will come from the CRC (Co-op Research Centre) that he funds through a levy 'per carton' of bananas and which is also funded through DPI and CSIRO funding.
When he installs sub-surface irrigation, it is going to cost him $1600 - $5000 per hectare, depending on the model used and how much of his existing infrastructure needs to be changed.
He runs 76 Ha of bananas, so that is a minimum of $121, 600.00 investment... and at a $2 per carton average profit, 60,800 cartons or 45 semi trailers leaving the farm to pay for it. That is a very significant investment for a life span of only 6 years.
He pulls about 625 bunches of bananas off each Hectare per 9 months... the paddock goes for 8 cycles of 9 months (6 years) before needing to be replanted. In replanting the sub-surface tape will be ripped out and ruined.
About 2 cartons per bunch = the full production of 48 hectares over 9 months to pay for 6 years of @5% water saving and 5% less pump running time. Its difficult to have that happen cost effectivly.
Easily paid for... if the farmers can levy the cost onto the consumer, which hasn't happened yet and I can't see consumers being willing for it to happen.
Farm irrigation is a complex issue... well beyond the understanding of me, and dare I say it... beyond the understanding of non-farmers, simply because we are not involved and are not aware of the issues.
Suffice to say, the forces to effect change are in place... but change comes at a cost and with time.
In a heavily regulated and unsubsidised market such as the Aust argiculture market, change comes as it can be afforded.
Change will occur within its own time, and my old mate in Tully is reading things like this, this and this and making changes as and when he can.
He's no-ones fool, and no amount of whinging or 'bright ideas' from enviros and greenies (like me) do him any good... he's the one paying the levy to get the research done to make the change.