FINAL REPORT
To:
Horticultural Development Council
Bradbourne House
Stable Block
East Malling
Kent
ME19 6DZ
Tomato: Reducing waste disposal costs through
the use of sustainable wood-based growth media.
March 2006
______
Commercial – In Confidence
Project Title: Tomato: Reducing waste disposal costs through the use
of sustainable wood-based growth media.
Project number:PC 209
ProjectLeader: Dr. Adrian Short, Stockbridge Technology Centre Ltd.
Report:Final report
Principal Experimental
Worker:Adrian Short
Project Consultants:Dr. Rob JacobsonDerek Hargreaves
Other contributors:Catherine Dawson, Melcourt Industries Ltd.
Dr. Phil Morley Wight Salads Group (WSG)
Andy Roe, Flavourfresh (FF)
Location of Project:Stockbridge Technology Centre
Cawood
Selby
North Yorkshire YO8 3TZ
Tel: 01757 268275Fax: 01757268996
Other Sites:Melcourt/ WSG/ FF
Joint Funded:The project is joint-funded by WRAP (Project No. RMD2-055) and Melcourt Industries Ltd.
Date Commenced:1 April 2004
Duration:24 months
Key words:Tomato, wood-based growing media, sustainable
production, waste disposal
Whilst reports issued under the auspices of the HDC are prepared from the best available information,
neither the authors or the HDC can accept any responsibility for inaccuracy or liability for loss,
damage or injury from the application of any concept or procedure discussed.
© 2006 Horticultural Development Council
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means without
prior permission from the HDC.
The results and conclusions in this report are based on a carefully monitored applied experiment in a large-scale experimental glasshouse. The conditions under which the studies were carried out and the results have been reported with detail and accuracy. However, because of the biological nature of the work it must be borne in mind that different circumstances and conditions could produce different results. Therefore, care must be taken with the interpretation of the results especially if they are used as the basis for commercial product recommendations.
Authentication
I declare that this work was done according to the procedures described herein and that this report represents a true and accurate record of the results obtained.
Signature………………………………………………………………………….
Julian Davies
Business Manager Agronomy
Stockbridge Technology Centre Ltd,
Cawood, Selby, North Yorkshire. YO8 3TZ.
Tel: 01757 268275; Fax:01757 268996
Date …………….
CONTENTS
GROWER SUMMARY
Headline
Background and expected deliverables
Summary of the project and main conclusions
Financial benefits to grower
Action points for growers
SCIENCE SECTION
1. INTRODUCTION
2. GLASSHOUSE TRIAL13
Materials & Methods
Cultural details
Irrigation and nutrition
Assessments
Crop growth and fruit development
Fruit yield & quality
Irrigation measurements
M80 & M100 analysis
Results & Discussion
Crop growth
Plant extension
Leaf area
Root development
Stem diameter
Truss development19
Yield
Yield from industry partners
Water use & moisture content
Solution and FCCB (M80 & M100) analysis
Conclusion
3. ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF FCCB FOR PRIMARY USE
Methodology/task undertaken
Economic evaluation of mineral wool system
Economic evaluation of FCCB system
Summary of economic evaluation
4. ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF FCCB FOR SECONDARY USE.
Introduction30
Methodology/task undertaken30
Findings/ results
Evaluation of market size and volume33
5.CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS4
6. INFORMATION DISSEMINATION
7. REFERENCES35
8. APPENDICES36
Appendix A: Data from full-season trial.
Appendix B: Propagation in peat-free growing medium.
Introduction
Materials and Methods
Results & Discussion
GROWER SUMMARY
Headline
- Agronomic assessments revealed that there were no consistent differences between tomato plants (cv Aranca) grown on fine-composted conifer bark (FCCB) and rockwool substrates. A good quality crop was produced in both FCCB treatments with numbers of marketable trusses harvested comparable to that achieved from a rockwool-grown crop. Fruit weight was slightly lower in the reduced irrigation FCCB treatment but not below the supermarket specification.
- The most cost effective option for a secondary use of the FCCB medium was application to agricultural land. However, waste regulations soon to be implemented might make this a less attractive choice.
- Processing once-used FCCB for secondary use, either via a green waste handler orgrowing media manufacturer, is economically viable and more environmentally beneficial than disposal to landfill.
Background and Expected Deliverables
The UK Government has set targets for reducing the amount of waste entering landfill as this resource is now in short supply. Tax levies on material entering such sites have increased significantly to encourage industries to develop more sustainable solutions to waste disposal. This has placed a considerable financial burden on protected salad growers who have to dispose of rockwool-based growing media at the end of each season.
The overall aim of this work was to improve waste management and reduce the cost of disposal of used growing media for the UK tomato industry. The approach was to assess the potential of candidate forest-residue-based growing media for glasshouse tomatoes. The supply chain for the raw materials was recognised as becoming increasingly reliable with the material derived from an environmentally sustainable source. It was proposed that at the end of a full-season tomato trial the successful medium, chosen from initial trials investigating a range of candidate materials, would be composted and assessed for secondary use as a soil conditioner and/ or growing medium for other crops. This would obviate the need for disposal to landfills.
Summary of the project and main conclusions
Preliminary trials:
Initial trials with tomato plants (cv Aranca) were conducted to assess the agronomic performance of four candidate test growing media (TGM) against a commercial rockwool control. TGM evaluated in this trial were:
Fine composted conifer bark (FCCB)
Fine composted wood fibre (FCWF)
Fine composted post-industrial wood blends (FCI)
Fresh pine fines (FPF)
Based on previous work, composted materials were shown to be more stable thanfresh material. However, FPF was included as a trial treatment to further assess whethercomposting is necessary prior to use as a growth substrate for tomato crops.
These trials revealed little difference with regard to the measured agronomic parameters (i.e. internode length, stem diameter, leaf length, plant extension) between the various TGM and rockwool. Fruit development also remained the same, until the fourth truss stage was reached. At this time plants grown on rockwool had slightly higher numbers of fruit developing on this truss.The extent of root development within the TGM was shown to be similar to that seen in rockwool. In the absence of any significant differences in agronomic performance between the TGM, FCCB was chosen as the best candidate material to take forward. This was based on price, availability and previous experience with this material.
Full season trial:
A full season tomato trial was established to further evaluate the performance of FCCB against a rockwool control. Two 200 m2 modern glasshouse units were made available for this work. Rockwool and FCCB substrate treatments were allocated to separate glasshouse units. A sub-treatment was included with the FCCB media to investigate the effect of a reduced irrigation strategy. One treatment received the same irrigation volume as rockwool (designated M100) and the other was supplied with irrigation at 80% of that supplied to rockwool (designated M80).
Agronomic assessments revealed that there were no significant differences between FCCB and rockwool grown plants irrigated at the same level in terms of plant extension, stem diameter and truss development. Plants in the M80 treatment developed thinner stems after 16 weeks of growth. This became less pronounced towards the end of the assessment period (week 28). Leaf area was also slightly reduced in the FCCB treatments.
Measurements of fruit yield showed that there were no differences in the numbers of fruit harvested between treatments. Trusses harvested from plants in the M80 treatment were lower in weight than those from M100 and rockwool (MW) treatments. However, they were still within the supermarket weight specification for this variety and so there was no reduction in value.
The FCCB media retained a moisture content slightly higher than that measured in rockwool and root development under both irrigation regimes was comparable, if not more extensive (certainly in the M80 treatment), than in the rockwool system.Drain measurements showed that run-off from both FCCB treatments was similar and slightly higher than shown for rockwool, re-affirming the potential for lower water application when using FCCB substrate.
End-of season analysis of FCCB medium revealed that it retained its original structure, with negligible breakdown of components.
Financial benefits to growers
One of the main motivations for this project was to provide data on the feasibility of growing media for protected crops that could avoid costly disposal to landfill and provide a resource that could be re-used as an environmentally sustainable product.
Economic evaluation of FCCB:
The producers of FCCB media (Melcourt Industries Ltd.) indicate that FCCB slabs can be commercially produced at levels competitive with rockwool. There are no extra costs associated with the primary use of FCCB for tomato production. The costs associated with transport away from site and preparation for secondary use are addressed in the next section.
Economic evaluation of wood based growing media for secondary use:
The various options for processing the once-used FCCB media were investigated. The economic analysis revealed:
- The most cost effective option for a secondary use of the FCCB media was in its application to agricultural land. However, waste regulations soon to be implemented might make this a less attractive choice.
- Processing FCCB for secondary use, either to a green waste handler, or collection by growing medium manufacturer for re-composting and re-use as growing medium or soil improver, are both more economically viable and environmentally beneficial than disposal to landfill.
Action points for growers
- From this work it has been shown that FCCB material can realistically be used for the commercial production of tomato crops without a significant loss in yield and quality compared with the current industry standard of growing in rockwool.
- Evaluation of secondary uses for FCCB material indicate that the options of application to land, disposal via green waste operator, and collection by growing media manufacturer, are economically more viable, and allow a more sustainable use of resources compared with disposal to landfill.
- UK growers of protected crops are being made more aware of the commercial potential of FCCB growing media and its secondary use potential. This will allow a greater flexibility of choice when faced with increasing landfill charges and the need to reduce these costs, both environmentally and economically.
Science Section
1. INTRODUCTION
Mineral wool (rockwool / MW) is currently the most widely used hydroponic substrate for commercial salad production in the UK. Its biologically inert nature allows optimum control of crop nutrition. It was calculated that the total area for salad crops (tomatoes, cucumbers, sweet peppers) grown in rockwool growing media was 401 hectares for the 1999 – 2000 growing season, although this may have since declined.This represented approximately 80% of the area grown for these crops (Drakes et al, 2001). Despite the fact that growers may re-use their rockwool slabs for several seasons, and that a recycling plant for rockwool exists, a large proportion of used slabs are still disposed to landfill. However, due to the Government’s strategy for waste management, an increasing tax is being levied on material entering landfill to encourage industries to adopt more sustainable approaches to waste disposal. This increasing financial burden on protected salad growers has led to investigations into alternative media.
The potential of forest-residue-based growing media (FRGM) was individually explored by several tomato growers in association with Melcourt Industries Ltd. and in other private trials (Harriman, pers. comm. 1995). These preliminary results were promising and laid the foundations for further investigation. The supply chain for these raw materials is increasingly reliable and is derived from an environmentally sustainable source.
This project seeks to develop a more sustainable approach to glasshouse tomato production. It is proposed that after initial use in tomato production, a wood based growing media could be re-composted, eliminating disposal to landfill, and then re-used as a soil conditioner or growing media for other crops (e.g. as a blend with green waste for peat-free compost). To work towards this goal, the project consortium includes applied scientists, commercial tomato growers and a growing media producer.
Following the results of initial trials at Stockbridge Technology Centre (STC) in 2004, fine composted conifer bark (FCCB) was chosen as the material that performed the best overall and offered the most assurance in terms of financial considerations. The aim of the work in 2005 was to assess the agronomic performance of a tomato crop grown in FCCB media in a season-long trial against rockwool as a commercial standard comparison.
Initial work has shown that FCCB has a lower water retention compared with rockwool. It was therefore decided to split the FCCB media into two treatments to look at potential water saving. One treatment received the same irrigation volume as rockwool (M100) and the other was supplied with irrigation at 80% of that supplied to rockwool (M80).
2. GLASSHOUSE TRIAL
Materials & Methods
Cultural Details
Tomato seeds, cultivar Aranca (Enza Zaden, UK) were sown onto either rockwool or standard seedling compost (Levingtons, M3) on the 12 December 2004. Young plants were transferred on the 10 February 2005 into two approx 200m2venlo glasshouse units. One glasshouse was used for each type of growing medium. Each glasshouse contained ten rows (8 experimental rows plus two guard rows) of either rockwool slabs (11L volume) or FCCB bags (20L volume). Four plants were allocated per bag to give a planting density of 2.6m-2, giving a total of 320 experimental plants in each glasshouse unit. Plants for the FCCB treatments (M80 & M100) were planted directly into this media rather than placed on top of the slab, as was the case with plants raised in rockwool (MW).
Each crop was grown according to commercial practice, with eight fruit allowed to develop to maturity on individual trusses. Biological control was used to control pests and fungicides used according to disease level. Table 1 summarises glasshouse environmental control parameters and irrigation frequency for this work.
Table 1. Environmental set-points for growth of a Tomato crop
Temperatuream / 17 oC
pm / 18 oC
Pre-night / 16 oC
Night / 17 oC
Irrigation (radiation sum
mls joule-1 m-2)
MW & M100 / 3
M80 / 2.4
CO2 enrichment set-point / 950 ppm
Two weeks after plants were transferred to the glasshouse, additional heads were taken (1 every other plant) to give a final head density of 4 per m2.
When the crops had matured, a continual de-leafing strategy was adopted which subsequently allowed approximately 18 leaves to remain on each plant. Crop management tasks (layering, twisting, and leaf removal) were carried out weekly. When the crops were producing ripe fruit, harvests were taken three times a week.
Irrigation and Nutrition
A typical commercial rockwool feed for tomato crops, as advised by the project consultant, was employed for the duration of the trial for all treatments. Regular monitoring of electrical conductivity (EC) and pH in the run-off was carried out to ensure correct levels were maintained in each treatment. When the crop reached maturity, irrigation was switched to radiation starts and applied at the rate of 3 ml per joule per m2. This was altered accordingly for the M80 treatment.
Assessments
Crop growth and fruit development
Plant growth was monitored weekly by tagging the growing point of the plant (20 plants were monitored for each treatment) from the beginning of the investigation and measurements were taken for:
1)Weekly plant extension.
2)Stem diameter (measurements taken at beginning of current weeks growth).
3)Truss development- the number of open flowers and number of fruit set measured at the end of a 1 week growth period.
4)Leaf area. The three lowest leaves were taken from eight plants per treatment on two separate occasions (12th May & 13th July). Leaf area was determined using a Li-3100 Area Meter (Li-Cor Inc., USA).
Growth measurements were initiated on the 1st March (Week 1 on graphs), 26 days after planting and 8 days after the separate irrigation treatments were imposed.
Fruit yield & quality
Numbers of trusses and bulk fresh weight were recorded for each treatment on a row basis. Harvests were carried out three times a week. Individual fruits (15 per treatment) were taken at the same stage of fruit ripeness at two time points during the growing season and the Brix Value (Total Dissolved Sugars [TDS]) was measured.
Irrigation measurements
Daily water application was monitored using spare drippers on each treatment line.
The run-off from each treatment was monitored with troughs placed beneath two rockwool slabs/ media bags in two rows per treatment and collected in containers at the end of each row. Measurements were initially taken weekly and this was subsequently increased to three times a week.
The moisture content of the substrate in each treatment was monitored at regular intervals using a W.E.T sensor (Delta T systems, Cambridge, UK). On each occasion 15 measurements were taken per treatment.
M80 & M100 analysis
A sample was taken for analysis at the mid-point of the trial (15 weeks after planting) in order to assess for any changes in the chemical or physical characteristics of the media. Samples were also taken in June and July to look for any gross differences in the composition of nutrients in the solution draining from the rockwool or FCCB treatments (M80 & M100).