Your reading list

Pulse crops defended against pollution charge

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Published: December 19, 2002

EDMONTON – A United Nations’ committee on climate change says pulses

are particularly bad crops for the environment, but an Agriculture

Canada scientist refutes that assumption.

Reynald Lemke agrees with climate experts that nitrous oxide is the

nastiest agricultural greenhouse gas, with 310 times the warming

potential of carbon dioxide.

But he was skeptical about the UN’s premise that pulses produce more of

that gas than other crops due to their nitrogen fixing ability. Now he

Read Also

A close-up of the hands of a farmer holding soybean seed in his cupped hands.

U.S. government investigates high input costs

The USDA and DOJ are investigating high input costs, but nothing is happening in Canada.

has evidence that is not the case.

Two years of research trials in Three Hills, Alta., and one year in

Swift Current, Sask., have shown pulses have the opposite effect, Lemke

told 150 fellow scientists attending the fourth annual Canadian Pulse

Research Workshop in Edmonton.

“Based on the information we have at hand, including a pulse into a

cereal-based system looks like it has a positive benefit. It actually

reduces nitrous oxide emissions relative to a continuously cropped

fertilized wheat.”

The estimated annual nitrous oxide loss for wheat crops in Three Hills

ranged from 600-800 grams per acre. It wasn’t much better during the

wheat phase of a canola-barley-pea-wheat rotation.

But during the pea phase of that rotation, the gas emission dropped to

between 180 and 320 g, or about one-third as much as the continuously

cropped wheat.

Data from the Swift Current site was inconclusive because 2001-02 was

such a dry year there that nitrous oxide emissions were minuscule for

all crops grown there.

Lemke said the research results bode well for the pulse industry,

especially with the federal government ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, an

international agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It may even

become a marketing tool to convince farmers to grow more pulses.

“If I’m diversifying and including pulses in the rotation, all the

indications are that’s a good thing for the environment,” he said.

Pulse Canada chair Germain Dauk wants more research done to confirm

Lemke’s findings.

“If they continue to bear out the same results from research, I think

we can use that to promote the pulse industry.”

He also thinks the results can be used to leverage more research

dollars out of Ottawa, a task that hasn’t been going as well as the

industry had hoped.

“The federal government doesn’t quite understand or don’t know how we

can fit into their programs,” said Dauk, who attended the Edmonton

workshop.

A senior Agriculture Canada official recently said Ottawa plans to

spend hundreds of millions more dollars on agriculture research

initiatives over the next five years. Most of that money will be spent

on projects related to food safety and the environment, two pillars of

the federal government’s new agricultural policy framework.

“We can take (the research results) to them and say, ‘here’s an example

of how we can fit into the environment pillar,’ ” said Dauk.

Lemke said his research trials also showed that nitrous oxide emissions

were lower on average under zero tillage systems than conventional

tilling.

In 2000-01 the average annual gas emission was 443 g per acre for

conventional and 284 g for zero till crops. In 2001-02, those numbers

were 547 and 337 g respectively.

About the author

Sean Pratt

Sean Pratt

Reporter/Analyst

Sean Pratt has been working at The Western Producer since 1993 after graduating from the University of Regina’s School of Journalism. Sean also has a Bachelor of Commerce degree from the University of Saskatchewan and worked in a bank for a few years before switching careers. Sean primarily writes markets and policy stories about the grain industry and has attended more than 100 conferences over the past three decades. He has received awards from the Canadian Farm Writers Federation, North American Agricultural Journalists and the American Agricultural Editors Association.

explore

Stories from our other publications