Tag: farming

How to avoid ‘double counting’ your carbon

Carbon accounting is a fast-moving space, and here at FCT, keeping on top of best practices is one of our top priorities. We commission regular external reviews of all our emissions factors to make sure we’re as compliant and up-to-date as possible. And yet even with the best data available, there’s always the possibility of human error (we all do it!) cropping up in a carbon report. 

One area we’re particularly keen to address is how to avoid ‘double counting’ when it comes to farming footprints. This refers to counting the same carbon/CO2e in different places, often (but not always) in the same report. 

For example, you might record all your freight and logistics fuel use in the ‘Fuels’ section of our Calculator, only to duplicate the entry under the ‘Distribution’ section. This would result in counting the same emissions twice, artificially inflating the total emissions figure. 

These errors can be subtle and easy mistakes to make, so it’s worth reading on to find out how to avoid them and embrace best practices.

How is double counting possible?

Our Carbon Calculator has many different emissions factors that you can record, reflecting the wide variety of needs and business profiles in modern farming. Because of the need for informative metrics and KPIs, our Calculator sometimes offers the option to record an emission or offset in more than one section. 

You can therefore choose to either record all of the carbon in one section, or to split it out for better insight in your final report. For example, you may want to be able to see the amount of fuel used in farming operations vs. the fuel used in the distribution of goods. Being able to record the carbon in more than one place is crucial to business insight, but it does introduce the risk of error. 

If we want to use these informative metrics, then it’s important to be aware of when you might double-count your carbon. 

Where in the Calculator might I be double counting?

We’ve listed below some of the most common areas where double counting may occur in our Calculator. For each one we’ve given an example of how it occurs, and the best practice in order to avoid it. 

Animal Feeds – Home grown vs. Bought in 

If you are growing your own animal feed on-farm, then you don’t need to account for this in the ‘Livestock’ section. To do so would overestimate your emissions. The Livestock section is only for feeds that are specifically bought in.

To avoid the double count: Make sure that anything recorded as a feed in the Livestock section is a bought-in feed. If not, it doesn’t need to be counted there!

Materials vs. Inventory

The Materials section of our Calculator allows you to record a wide variety of items that are used in construction and repair work. Our Inventory section, on the other hand, is there to record larger capital items such as new outbuildings or farm machinery. This difference is key, as any items within the Inventory section will have their carbon impact depreciated over a period of 10 years.

It’s also possible to record your own custom building projects inside the Inventory section. For example, you might choose to record all the materials associated with a new outbuilding. This might be done so that you can achieve a more precise footprint for a non-standard construction. 

Where materials are purchased for running or regular repairs of existing installations, record these in the Materials section.

To avoid the double count: Make sure you’re not recording any custom-build projects in both Materials and Inventory. They only need to be recorded in one of these sections!

Sequestration – Double Counting Offsets 

If you have previously sold any carbon offsets, for example through soil organic carbon sequestration, then you should not count the offset in your report. To do so would be an example of double counting as the benefits are no longer attributable to your farm business. 

To avoid the double count: Make sure you’re only recording potential sequestration that hasn’t been sold or accounted for elsewhere. 

Sequestration – Double Counting potential sequestration

If you have entered an area of land under the sequestration option: “Soil Organic Matter” or “Soil Organic Carbon” (using information from soil sampling), you should not also enter those areas of land under other sequestration options (such as Countryside Stewardship Schemes, even if the land is receiving payment for that scheme). Direct soil sampling is preferable in this scenario. Similarly, whilst in practice you can “stack” the payments you receive from stewardship grants, you must only enter areas of land for sequestration under one potential sequestration option (so if “My field” is 5ha, I can enter soil sampling data from those 5ha OR the fact that they are under a Countryside Stewardship Scheme).

To avoid the double count: Include each field area under only one potential ‘Sequestration’ option.

Fuel Use – Distribution vs. Farming Operations 

If you want to split out your fuel use into distribution and farming operations, you have the option to record these separately. Any farm fuel use such as red diesel can be recorded under ‘Fuels’. Any fuel used in moving goods can be put under ‘Distribution’. 

To avoid the double count: We recommend splitting out fuel use between ‘Fuels’ (i.e. farm operations) and ‘Distribution’.

The Exceptions

As with all good rules, there are some apparent exceptions:

  • you CAN add multiple crops that have been grown on the same area of land in the same year (but only include those that have been harvested or terminated within the reporting period). 

Free-to-Use Equine Carbon Calculator

Taking The Reins: Equine Carbon Calculator Launched to Inspire Environmental Action

A consortium of equine organisations is rallying the industry to play a leading role in addressing the climate crisis and shaping a better future, with the launch of the first nationwide equine carbon calculator today.

Pioneered by equine environmental sustainability specialists White Griffin and the Farm Carbon Toolkit, in partnership with Derby College Group, Hartpury University and Sparsholt College Group, the calculator has been developed to empower equine businesses and horse owners to better understand their environmental impact and take meaningful steps to mitigate it.

The free-to-use tool – accessible here – also identifies opportunities for businesses to minimise their energy costs and maximise their potential to regenerate the countryside.

While carbon footprint tools are prevalent in the agricultural sector and play a pivotal role in government carbon reduction targets, no such tools have been available at scale for equine premises until now.

Without insights into the scale of the challenges and opportunities, the equine industry is hindered in setting meaningful targets. The equine carbon calculator seeks to bridge this gap, empowering stakeholders to make informed decisions for a sustainable future.

Director of White Griffin, Ruth Dancer said:

“The equine community holds a deep connection to the natural world, so we have a unique opportunity to safeguard it for future generations. By implementing the equine carbon calculator, we can better understand our emissions and find innovative ways to reduce them, saving money and paving the way for a better future.”

The launch of the carbon calculator marks the beginning of a comprehensive campaign to educate and inspire the equine industry on environmental sustainability. This initiative will be complemented by a suite of resources set to launch in autumn, offering support to stakeholders across the horse racing and equestrian sectors.

It follows a broader industry shift toward a more sustainable future for equestrians and horse racing, underscored by the tangible impacts of climate change on the industry. Following the hottest year on record in 2023 coupled with significant flooding, the UK equine industry suffered multiple cancellations across the full spectrum of events, highlighting the urgency of addressing these challenges. 

White Griffin’s previous reports for the British Horse Racing Authority and the British Equestrian Federation, have laid strong foundations for these sustainability initiatives, emphasising the need for tools and resources to support businesses in their sustainability efforts.

Farm Carbon Toolkit project lead, Lizzy Parker said,

“After years of supporting agricultural farms with reducing their environmental impact through a clear and easy-to-use tool, we know how important measuring to monitor is. Our calculator allows equine businesses to properly understand their carbon footprint and make the necessary changes to reduce their emissions.”

The equine carbon calculator is the result of a collaborative effort among academic institutions committed to driving real change in the industry.

The project began when Assistant Principal of Derby College Group, Jon Collins, began work on their own carbon footprint and discovered that while the tool had everything they needed to understand the farm’s footprint, they struggled to use it for their equine yard. Speaking with Sparsholt College Group and Hartpury University, Collins discovered that both organisations were also seeking to develop a tool to support their equine students and businesses and therefore a collaboration was formed in order to pool resources. Collins said,

“I chose Farm Carbon Toolkit to develop the resource because I found their tool to be easiest to use and provided the best user experience. Understanding the busy lives of equine business owners, we knew that we had to develop something that was clear, useful and also provided invaluable insight and comparisons with other equine businesses. We are proud to be delivering this with the support of Landex and will be rolling the tool out to all students, organisations and interested individuals who are seeking to make a difference in their day to day lives to the environment we all depend on.”

Project lead for Hartpury University, Rachel Collins, said: “We’re passionate about sustainability at Hartpury and have worked with both White Griffin and Farm Carbon Toolkit to deliver the most up-to-date training and knowledge to our students on equine sustainability. This tool represents an important step in our commitment to drive the industry forward towards a sustainable future. We are proud to be part of this collaboration, leveraging our expertise to empower stakeholders and effect meaningful change.”

Mark Treagust, Vice Principal of Sparsholt College Group said: “Collaboration within the equine sector is vital to address our industry’s greatest risk – the climate crisis. Leveraging our collective wealth of knowledge in land management and equine welfare, we must support businesses in making impactful changes. This tool initiates a large-scale process for thousands of individuals all over the country. By uniting as academic institutions and utilising the Landex network, we can effect real, much needed change.”

Farm Carbon Calculator External Review Completed

Farm carbon calculator logo

By Liz Bowles, Farm Carbon Toolkit Chief Executive

Having confidence in the accuracy of the Farm Carbon Calculator

In a recent blog post, we explored all the factors that influence the accuracy of carbon footprint, from the data the user inputs, through to the processes that ensure the Farm Carbon Calculator’s calculations and emissions factors are correct, and the ongoing testing carried out. However, like any good service, we understand that you want independent experts to endorse our tools.

Feeling confidence from external experts

Like any good service provider, we actively and regularly seek external review of our tools. In autumn 2023 we asked the independent global climate consultancy, the Carbon Trust to review our Calculator, including the methodologies, calculations, assumptions and factors that underpin a working calculator against the GHG Protocol standards. Following this review, we have developed an Action Plan to address issues identified which will be completed by December 2024.

Alongside this work, Defra commissioned ADAS to look at a number of leading UK Carbon Calculators to improve our understanding of the differences between them and to support methodology harmonisation going forward.Our Calculator was one of those included in the comparison. A key finding from this work was that although there are many ways to complete a carbon footprint inaccurately there is no “one way” of doing it accurately. This is mainly because the different Calculators compared are seeking to answer slightly different questions.

The differences identified were found in the areas of scoping, emissions factors used and standards aligned with

Scoping describes what is measured, and some calculators include things that others don’t. At the Farm Carbon Calculator, for instance, we measure as much as possible of a farm business. This includes, for instance, the embodied energy in buildings and machinery, upstream emissions of various inputs, and gives the option to estimate all potential carbon sequestration on farm. Not all calculators go this far.

There are some standard and some non-standard emissions factors used. For instance, the UK Government produces a comprehensive list of emissions (UK GHG Inventory & Conversion Factors) from fuels and energy, livestock and crops that all calculators will use. But some of the other factors come from a range of other scientific papers and there may be some variability in which ones are used by different calculators. All calculators currently carry out their own research independently of each other.

The UK Department for Energy Security and Net Zero publishes annual updates to emission factors

There are a number of standards that describe what and how to measure carbon footprints. Whilst there are a number of standards that relate to food and farming, there is a lack of consensus over which standard is ‘the one’ to adhere to. We are therefore implementing a process whereby users can choose to align their carbon reports to one of a few recognised standards. This will be available in due course.

You can find the full report and recommendations in the ADAS Report for Defra.

Following this report, we are working actively to support higher levels of harmonisation where this is possible to reduce results variability from different Calculators. 

Hopefully, this gives you, our valued users, confidence that we are rigorous in our processes, that we conduct regular independent reviews, and that we are fully engaged with industry, Government and reviewers to improve and meet the expectations of a maturing sector.

As an organisation that exists to help farmers and growers measure, understand and reduce their carbon footprint,  we always operate in the best interests of our users which includes ensuring our Calculator is as accurate as possible at all times. We are independent, providing a free carbon calculator for farmers and growers, and have a process of continual improvement in place. As a regular user of our Calculator, you can always compare current and past results using the most up-to-date Calculator, allowing you to track business progress to net zero.

You can find all you need to know about the Farm Carbon Calculator here. If you need more information please contact us at calculator@farmcarbontoolkit.org.uk or phone us on 07541 453413.

Building trust in Carbon Calculators in Agriculture

Farm carbon calculator logo

By Liz Bowles, Farm Carbon Toolkit Chief Executive

In a recent blog post, we explored all the factors that influence the accuracy of carbon footprint, from the data the user inputs, through to the processes that ensure the Farm Carbon Calculator’s calculations and emissions factors are correct, and the ongoing testing carried out. Here we would like to tell you about how we are involved with activity to support Calculator harmonisation to increase levels of trust in all UK Farm Carbon Calculators.

Defra is very keen to support the agricultural sector in embracing greenhouse gas accounting. To this end in 2023, they commissioned ADAS to look at a number of leading UK Carbon Calculators to improve our understanding of the differences between them and to support methodology harmonisation going forward. Not surprisingly the differences between the Calculators investigated arise from three main areas – scoping, factors and standards.

Scoping describes what is measured, and some calculators include things that others don’t. At the Farm Carbon Calculator, for instance, we measure as much as possible of a farm business.

There are some standard and some non-standard emissions factors used. For instance, the UK Government produces a comprehensive list of emissions (UK GHG Inventory Conversion Factors) from fuels & energy, livestock and crops that all calculators will use. But some of the other factors come from a range of other scientific papers and there may be some variability in which ones are used by different calculators. 

There are a number of standards that describe what and how to measure carbon footprints. Whilst there are a number of standards that relate to food and farming, there is a lack of consensus over which standard is ‘the one’ to adhere to.

Guidance for all carbon calculators

A series of recommendations for all Carbon Calculators, Industry and UK governments were made by ADAS as a result of this work – ADAS report . Here we list those recommendations and how we are implementing them.

SectorWhat is the ask?What is FCC doing?
Industry and GovernmentClearly define the scope required for farm level carbon assessments and how they will be usedWe are actively working with industry bodies to harmonise the way emissions data is collected and calculations are made
CalculatorsAlign with the requirements of the latest standards and guidance – currently GHG Protocol standardsFollowing our Carbon Trust Review we are implementing our agreed action plan to ensure full alignment with the GHG Protocol
CalculatorsRegularly review and update Calculators to account for changes in scientific knowledge, carbon accounting methodologies and new emission factorsWe update the Calculator in spring and autumn each year, covering all three areas outlined in the recommendation
CalculatorsComply with the latest IPCC guidanceWe already adhere to IPCC guidance
CalculatorsTo use emission factors from agreed sources for the embedded emissions in fertilisers, feed and fuelsWe base emissions factors on the GFLI database, which is considered the most robust source of this data. However, we would welcome a more UK-centric database which is required to be used by all Calculators. Agricultural carbon tools have been struggling with the challenge of embedded emissions in purchased livestock for years
IndustrySupport the development of appropriate emissions factors for the embedded emissions in purchased livestock
CalculatorsPresent outputs in compliance with the latest standardThrough our adoption of the Carbon Trust Recommendations our outputs will align with the latest standards
Government and industryDefine consistent disaggregated output categories for use by all calculators.(not applicable)
Calculator providersBuild user confidence through transparency of approach and third-party verification of the alignment of calculators to minimum standardsOur methodology is freely available on our website and we annually carry out an independent review of the Farm Carbon Calculator

Alongside the work of ADAS, FCT is working with other UK Calculators as well as industry bodies such as Dairy UK to support more rapid harmonisation to reduce report results variation for farmers. Watch this space!

As an organisation that exists to help farmers and growers measure, understand and reduce their carbon footprint,  we always operate in the best interests of our users which includes ensuring our Calculator is as accurate as possible at all times. We are independent, providing a free carbon calculator for farmers and growers, and have a process of continual improvement in place. As a regular user of our Calculator you can always compare current and past results using the most up-to-date Calculator, allowing you to track business progress to net Zero.


You can find all you need to know about the Farm Carbon Calculator here If you need more information please contact us at calculator@farmcarbontoolkit.org.uk or phone us on 07541 453413

Open for entries: Carbon Farmer of the Year

Announcing the launch of the 2024 Carbon Farmer of the Year Competition

February of this year sees the launch of the 2024 Farm Carbon Toolkit’s Carbon Farmer of the Year Competition. This competition champions UK farmers who are leading the way in adopting farming practices and developing new technologies which reduce farm emissions whilst optimising output, and adapting to climate change. 

After the success of last year’s competition we are delighted to announce that the 2024 competition is now open for entries. Click here to learn more.

Your beef enterprise: how to accurately estimate emissions and sequestration

To accurately estimate the emissions and sequestration from your beef enterprise, you will need to add data to the following sections of the Calculator:

  • When setting up the report, make sure you enter the area of grazing (grassland) as well as any non-agricultural land area and cultivated land (arable or horticultural)
  • Use the Livestock section and select beef cattle. Add as many entries as you need to cover your herd. For example, you may have two groups of steers with different liveweights or kept on the farm for different lengths of time. In which case, enter the steers from the first group with one liveweight and then the steers from the second group as a separate entry with their own liveweight. This will give you more accurate emissions from their enteric fermentation (gut methane).
  • To calculate the average head of livestock on the farm over a 12 month period, take the number in a particular livestock category per month (so you have 12 “snapshots”) add these together and then divide by 12. Our data collection sheet has a help sheet for this. For growing animals, you may want to use the same approach for calculating average liveweight (our defaults assume a midpoint liveweight through the year for growing cattle but growth rates won’t be linear so using the snapshot approach may be more accurate)
  • Livestock entries also capture the CO2 equivalent (CO2e) of the methane emissions from enteric fermentation and of the nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions from the animals’ manure over the course of the year. The Calculator asks you how this manure is managed as this has an impact on the N2O emissions
  • You have the option to input the average dry matter intake (DMI) per animal per day (kgDM/head/day). The DMI can be used to more accurately calculate the enteric emissions of the cattle, and if left blank, a simpler algorithm will be used that does not consider DMI
  • You will need to account for any supplemental feeding via the Livestock > Animal feeds option – this is for brought-in feeds that were produced off-farm
  • Account for all your fuel use, electricity use, consumables, inventory items and waste produced using the relevant sections (Fuels, Materials,  Inventory, Waste). However, if you also have a dairy herd or arable operation, you may prefer to create a separate report and use this as an Overheads report to apportion shared capital items and energy usage emissions between your enterprises. Watch our video to see how this works in practice.
  • We recommend getting your soil sampled and have a guide on how to do this effectively and affordably. By monitoring your soil organic matter or soil organic carbon over time you can begin to log sequestration rates in your grazed (or other) soils. Once you have two years’ worth of soil sample results, you can enter these in the Calculator under Sequestration > Soil Organic Matter (you will also need bulk density measurements and a record of the depth of the sample).
  • If you don’t have directly sampled soil data for all your soils, you can use our range of proxy values for different Countryside Stewardship and habitat classes to estimate how much carbon your soils may be sequestering year-on-year. You can also measure the length of any hedgerows and field margins (ungrazed) and enter these to estimate the carbon sequestered in them on a yearly basis.

The Financial Reward of Reducing Carbon

By Robert Purdew, Farm Carbon and Soils Advisor

There is a growing concern about carbon “tunnel vision” in agriculture, where the sole focus is on reducing emissions without considering the bigger picture. Reducing emissions is crucial, yet it’s important to acknowledge that it is only one piece of the puzzle and focusing solely on carbon can neglect factors such as soil health, water quality, biodiversity and other issues such as pollution. There is also often concern from farmers about how the pressures to achieve net zero targets can impact profitability, especially when incentives to be net zero are limited or non-existent, and investments in the infrastructure and technology required to transition to low-carbon farming are high.

But this doesn’t have to be the case. We can use an understanding of a farm’s emissions to make informed decisions to change management practices that can lead directly to both reduced emissions and increased profitability, and we can point to an increased number of farmers who are doing just this.

Mike and Sam Roberts farm 435 acres at Blable Farm, of which a large proportion is down to herbal leys. After Sam returned to the farm in 2018 a decision was made to review the whole operation and, in conjunction with James Daniel of Precision Grazing, the decision was made to reduce the herd slightly from 180 to 150 cows, implement rotational grazing on diverse leys and to focus on reducing inputs and improving soil health.

Cattle out wintering at Blable Farm

The effects were immediate and obvious. Soil health has seen a rapid improvement with better structure, increased earthworm numbers and soil organic matter is on the rise. The grazing period has been increased from 6 to 12 months and the farm hasn’t bought fertiliser since 2021, with none being used last year. Importantly, animal performance has increased in line with improved soil health and while cow numbers were reduced initially Mike and Sam are looking at increasing numbers again. All of this has seen a significant saving on input costs which has been re-invested into the business, including a full soil audit to better understand how soil health is improving. In line with reduced costs on-farm emissions have been reduced significantly with Mike confident the farm can reach net zero within 5 years, a commitment made as part of being a demo farm for the Farm Net Zero project.

Another example of a farmer using an understanding of their carbon footprint to drive down costs and improve profitability is Tom Burge of Oaremead Farm. Tom farms 760 acres of grassland on Exmoor and runs both a suckler herd and commercial sheep flock. In 2017 Tom began shifting to a more regenerative farming system which predominantly focussed on an improvement in grazing management, once again aided by James Daniel from Precision Grazing.

A person standing in a grassy field with cows

Description automatically generated

Over 5 years, Tom has completely cut out the use of artificial fertiliser and reduced his feed use by over 70%. This has been made possible by an increase in dry matter grown of 0.9 tDM/ha, through improved grazing management, and has reduced input costs by 50%, with a similar reduction in emissions from inputs, as shown in the chart below. Crucially the farm is now profitable before taking into account income from subsidies and environmental schemes. In the next 5 years, Tom plans to completely cut out bought-in feed and to have halved fuel use and, like Mike and Sam, be well on the road to net zero while remaining highly productive and profitable.

Oaremead Farm emissions from inputs

These are just two of an increasing number of examples that we are coming across as we work with more and more farmers who are using their carbon emissions as just one metric to help improve their farm businesses. And far from impacting just a farm’s emissions and bottom line, the management changes that are being implemented are having beneficial impacts on those ecosystem services mentioned previously, soil health, biodiversity, water quality and reduced pollution. Proof if ever it was needed of the potential for long-term sustainability within our farming systems.

Five farms in Cornwall on a journey towards Net Zero

We’re excited to share a series of five new videos that showcase some of the farms in Cornwall that are part of the Farm Net Zero project.

Each video shares a different farm’s journey as it works to improve the environment, produce nutritious food, while also responding to climate risks, such as flooding. There is a specific focus in these videos on how the farms are engaging within their local communities, to help tackle these issues. The Farm Net Zero project includes practical advice for farmers on how to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, showcases innovation, provides robust science through soil testing and carbon footprinting, and inspires other farmers to tell their stories to consumers on the steps that they are taking to address climate change and protect soil health.

The full-length video below includes all of the following five stories. If you prefer to view each story separately, please simply click on each of the links here:

The importance of managing manure on-farm 

Written by Becky Willson, Business Development & Technical Director.

Manure is a fantastic on-farm resource. This is because it can deliver a source of nutrients that can be used to grow crops, as well as enhancing soil biological activity, feeding the soil microbes and helping provide a steady supply of organic matter. This can ensure that soils are in the best condition structurally, chemically and biologically. Manure is one of the most important resources that is produced on-farm, and should be valued rather than seen as a waste product. 

A key way to be able to reduce reliance on fertilisers is to develop efficient and effective strategies for managing nutrients and manures on-farm. 

Nutrient management planning

Managing nutrients in a systematic way through planning is a vital aspect of sustainable farming. It is a ‘win-win’ practice which generates advantages across economic and environmental parameters, and allows for the creation of a sustainable agricultural system which is resilient to climatic and economic change. 

Nutrient management planning facilitates optimal use of nutrients from all available sources. Matching inputs of nutrients (from fertilisers and organic manures) to the demand from the crop will allow for an optimal yield, minimise the use of nutrients (which saves costs) and minimises the risk of losses to the environment from nutrients.  

Slurries and solid manures are valuable fertilisers but may also be potential sources of pollution. Within increasing economic and environmental pressures on farm businesses, it makes sense to exploit the fertiliser value of manures while taking action to prevent pollution. 

Most farm assurance schemes require a manure management plan to be completed as part of the certification process. However even without the compulsion of a scheme, having a plan which marks out any environmental features, watercourses, sloping fields which may cause run off and any areas will be a useful resource to consult before applying manures.  

The need for effective manure management

The most effective way of dealing with livestock manures is to apply them at appropriate rates to agricultural land for the benefits of soil and crops. Getting manure management right allows for sustainable use of resources which provides economic savings and reduces the amount of artificial fertiliser that is required. Manures, when stored and applied correctly have fantastic benefits in building resilience within your farming system, cutting costs and lowering your carbon footprint, however if they are applied in too high a quantity or at the wrong time of year then they are an environmental risk. So it is the job of farmers to maximise the benefits that can arise and minimise the risks.

Nutrient management planning to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions

Nitrogen emissions to the air from farms include greenhouse gases, the most potent of which is nitrous oxide. Nitrous oxide is one of the biggest contributions that agriculture makes to climate change. Soil nitrous oxide emissions originate from three sources, soil microorganism activity (55%), organic manure applications (18%) and Nitrogen fertiliser applications, (27%). As such, careful management that maximises the efficiency of any fertiliser applied, takes account soil and climate conditions, and uses the nutrients within manures for crop growth will help to reduce the amount of nitrous oxide lost. 

Nutrient and manure management planning will also help reduce ammonia emissions. While ammonia isn’t a greenhouse gas, it negatively impacts air quality and human health. The amount of ammonia which is lost depends on a variety of factors including manure type, the method and timing of applications, soil pH, the weather conditions at spreading, the soil moisture content and how the manure is stored. As such there are a variety of mitigation options available that are made easy by planning how manure is managed to reduce these risks. 

Soil Testing

Although not always considered as linked to nutrient management planning, monitoring and controlling the pH of soils on-farm is the first step toward good nutrient management. If soil pH is not correct then any nutrients that are applied through fertiliser or manure applications will not be available to the crop and may be lost from the soil incurring costs, reduced yields and pollution issues. 

Effective use of manures – Storage

Having sufficient slurry or manure storage means that effective nutrient management planning is much easier. With sufficient storage capacity, slurries and manures can be applied at the optimal time for plant growth and crop uptake, as well as being applied when the soil and field conditions are right and damage (including compaction and run off) is minimised.  However for some farmers who don’t have enough storage, slurry has to be spread in less than ideal conditions, when there is little crop growth and nutrient uptake. It is in these situations where environmental losses can be the highest. 

Thankfully there are ways that storage can be optimised. This can include minimising the amount of rainfall that is able to enter the store. Rainfall can dilute the nutrient content of the slurry but also costs more in manure application – more water is held within the slurry leading to a higher volume to be spread. Mending guttering, diverting clean water away from stores and covering yards to minimise the amount of water that is entering the store are all low cost ways to help maintain the nutritional value of the manure and also reduce costs. Covering stores is also an option and there are various cover options that are available depending on the store type and design. Floating covers will also reduce the amount of ammonia which is released into the atmosphere which has air quality benefits. 

With solid manure it is important to consider the siting of field heaps and managing the heap to ensure that Nitrate leaching is minimised. Composting of FYM will provide a more stable and uniform material which will have benefits for soil biology, but will not provide such a high readily available Nitrogen source as fresh manure. 

Effective use of manures – Application 

Ensuring that manures are applied at the right rate and the right time is the most important step to reducing environmental risk and improving economic performance of the farm.  The method of application can affect the amount of nitrogen that is available to the crop. Although the total nitrogen content within the manure cannot be altered by the method of application, the proportion of the nitrogen that is available to the growing crops is improved by using low trajectory machinery.

Spreader technology has developed over recent years so that now there are numerous options available for spreading slurry (where losses are potentially higher). Broadcast spreaders will waste nutrients, but this can be minimised by using injection or band spreaders which put the slurry directly on the soil surface or into a narrow slot. For solid manures, the evenness of spreading is far improved by using a rear discharge spreader. If manure or slurry is to be incorporated, ensuring that it is done quickly after application and not just left on the surface where the nutrients may well be lost is important.

Optimising the use of manures and slurries on-farm will provide benefits through improving profitability, resilience and soil health. For more information on manures and nutrient management planning please visit the FCT toolkit pages to access a range of resources.  

A Day in the Life of…Jonathan Smith, Impact Manager

As a grower of organic vegetables, my day always starts on the farm.

Depending on the time of year, I need to open polytunnels, water plants, and harvest crops. I sell all my produce locally on the Isles of Scilly where I live and work, so once harvested I will go and deliver the veg to the point of sale. I also have to fit in planting, sowing, weeding and other jobs.

Being a grower gives me huge pleasure, despite the challenges, but also a grounded perspective on farming, growing and carbon management on farms. I look at my farm often through a carbon lens, and making management decisions to minimise carbon emissions, whilst maximising carbon sequestration feels second nature. My farm business has been consistently carbon-negative for many years.

After lunch, I put a different hat on and work for Farm Carbon Toolkit as the Impact Manager. Having previously led the Farm Carbon Calculator development (since its creation in 2009), this new role gives me a different perspective on the organisation. My primary aim is to understand how we measure the impact of the work we do, and to help the organisation increase its impact. Many organisations in the social enterprise sector are very driven by social and environmental change, but can easily overlook how effective their work is and what change it’s delivering. After all, this is a primary reason many of us in FCT are in the organisation!

Day to day, I work across the organisation in trying to measure what we do currently, and how to collect that information. Once I have that, I’m involved in understanding what the opportunities are for change in the way we operate. This work feeds into the day-to-day work on communications, as well as the longer-term strategy work focussed on the next three years. At the end of the day, we want to help as many farmers and growers as possible reach carbon net zero or beyond.

As a Director, I also have oversight of the organisation, and this is a role I enjoy a lot. However my favourite parts are talking to the farmers and growers who are on the journey to net zero – or already there, and seeing the changes they’ve implemented. That is always inspiring and makes the work of the organisation very tangible.