Primo Maxx growth regulator benefits

Primo cuts the cost and carbon footprint of turf management

A new report from Cranfield University's Centre for Sports Turf Technology has identified the potential for up to 60% cut in Global Warming CO₂ emissions by regulating turf growth with Primo Maxx, along with valuable financial savings in the cost of turf maintenance.
 

The impact of climate change and the trend towards warmer conditions are well documented. Turf managers see the implications every day, in the changing seasonal effects on turf growth, pests and diseases - along with the challenge of extreme weather conditions.

The use of fossil fuels to drive energy production liberates CO₂ and, coupled with mass deforestation reducing radiated heat escaping from the planet, has seen global temperatures rise by 0.74°C over the past 100 years. Recent weather patterns indicate the pace of change is accelerating.

The report's authors, Dr Iain James and Dr Mark Bartlett, of Cranfield University, highlight: "Political, public and economic pressures have increased on industries to account for and reduce carbon emissions. For sports turf grass, aesthetics and playability are the driving forces, rather than agricultural yield or industrial production capacity; therefore a modified approach must be taken."

Based on information from published sources, Syngenta technical data and interviews with turf managers and green keepers, the Cranfield University team has calculated using the CranTurfC model that programmes to regulate turf growth on sports turf will reduce CO₂ emissions from turf maintenance by 40 to 60%, as well as reducing turf maintenance costs by between 5 and 20% (Table 1).

Table 1. Reduction in CO₂ emissions and costs of managing turf grass with growth regulator applications.

Source: Cranfield University Centre for Sports Surface Technology

The report highlights that Primo Maxx has a wide range of beneficial effects on the maintenance of sports turf, with the key effect in reducing turf growth for extended periods of time. "This reduction in growth has associated reductions in the costs of maintenance, due to less mowing, irrigation and fertiliser being required."

With the reduced physical inputs used managing turf in growth regulation, there is also a major effect of reducing CO₂ emissions. The Cranfield researchers also factored in the physical cost and emissions from the manufacturing process in calculating the overall financial and environmental return from growth regulator use.

Dr James highlights that, whilst the Cranfield model did have to simplify some aspects of turf management and make some assumptions to create comparable results, there are clear practical implications. For example, the more use a mower unit receives, the more frequently the engine oil must be changed, which is directly linked to the CO₂ efflux increase and with the financial costs of operation.

"CranTurfC showed for all sports turf scenarios studied, that using a growth regulator significantly reduced the CO₂ footprint, compared to the typical conventional management programmes. The range of the scale of reduction is closely linked to the reduction in mowing operations that are required to keep turf maintained for that specific amenity use," he reports.

"The financial savings indicated by CranTurfC is more closely linked to the presentation of the surface, with greater savings predicted where the relative cost of maintenance is higher."

Practical Implications

On winter sports pitches, the Cranfield model predicts a standard sized football pitch (70 x 100m) would create a total annual CO₂ efflux of 1270 kg under a standard maintenance regime. Where Primo Maxx is used, however, the efflux falls to 705 kg CO₂ per year - a reduction of 45%.

Pitches managed less intensively for amateur recreational use produce less emissions - 508 kg CO₂ per year with standard maintenance - but have potential for even greater percentage savings, down over 50% to 245 kg CO₂ per pitch. A local authority groundsman with 10 pitches could cut the carbon footprint by over 2600 kg CO₂ per year.

Nitrogen Effect

In a further development that could see the carbon footprint of turf reduced, the Cranfield report highlights the interaction of the effect of a growth regulator and fertiliser on the whole soil system may also have an impact on the overall greenhouse gas release from the system.

When nitrogen fertiliser is applied, up to 1% of all N applied emerges as N₂O. If a pitch was fertilised at 190 kg/ha over the season, for example, this would release approximately 1.9 kg N₂O per year. Whilst only small in itself, the global warming impact of N₂O is over 300 times greater than CO₂, so the gas release would have a equivalence of 589 kg CO₂ per ha per year.

Whilst nitrogen is still required with a Primo Maxx programme, and a small amount is recommended as a tank mix with all applications, trials and turf managers experience has indicated there may be potential to reduce overall fertiliser inputs.

Syngenta Technical Manager, Dr Simon Watson, believes this same N₂O release equation applies to all nitrogenous compounds, including grass clippings. Where clippings are left on the surface, a proportion of N₂O will be rapidly released; composting will also release the gas, over a longer period of time. Where Primo Maxx can reduce clipping yield by up to 80%, the release of N₂O may be correspondingly reduced.

"It is also important to take into account that photosynthetic activity of turf grass captures CO₂ from the atmosphere," adds Dr Watson. "In practice, with Primo treated turf more energy may be retained and diverted into the development of a greater root mass, locking carbon into plant material for longer than leaf growth mown off and composted."

Further Syngenta research is now planned to investigate the effects of Primo Maxx on other greenhouse gas efflux, including NO₂ and N₂O, and its use to enhance carbon capture within the sports turf system.