With more than 1.5 million electric vehicles on the road, farmers are increasingly embracing the technology.
But the technology isn’t perfect and is often used to produce food that is more environmentally friendly.
A new study from the University of Minnesota shows that a few simple tweaks can make a significant difference in the health of a farmer’s crops.
The study found that when a farmer is using the same technologies that have been shown to be helpful in the past, he or she can significantly improve the health and quality of their crops by about 5 percent, or roughly one-third of the cost.
This is the same effect seen with other farming techniques.
“It’s not enough to be a good farmer and be able to use the right technology,” said Chris Koehn, an associate professor of agricultural engineering and director of the USDA’s Iowa State University Extension Service.
“You have to have a vision that your farmers will benefit from the technology.”
Koehm is one of the authors of the study, which was published in the journal Plant Science.
“This is one example of how farmers can improve their crops without having to purchase expensive, expensive technology,” he said.
“The key is to understand how technology interacts with the environment.
It’s the same for a plant as it is for a vehicle.
You don’t need expensive equipment to grow food.
But if you want to do something like growing tomatoes, you need something that is sustainable and produces high yields.”
The study used data collected in the 2016 Cooperative Extension Extension of the U.S. Department of Agriculture to find how the health, productivity and greenhouse gas emissions of a variety of crops differed from the same crop grown in conventional ways.
In a conventional system, the soil is exposed to the sun for months, sometimes even years.
This exposes the soil to high levels of the greenhouse gas nitrous oxide (N2O), a greenhouse gas that is known to cause plant death and slow the growth of plants.
In the study’s agricultural extension pilot project, the farmers were growing tomatoes grown in a solar-powered farm.
In that project, they had to choose between growing plants that produced large quantities of N2O and plants that didn’t produce N2Os at all.
The researchers compared the effects of two different types of crop management methods: “In the conventional system with no solar-generated N2o, we found that the yield of tomatoes was about 6 percent lower, and the N2 production was about 17 percent lower,” said Koehns.
“In contrast, when we switched to solar-generating plants with N2N, the yield was about 25 percent higher.”
A conventional system that uses solar-driven fertilizers is not only cheaper, but it also produces more N2 than a solar powered system,” Koehs said.
The results showed that when the farmers switched to the hybrid system, they increased their yield and increased their N2 output by about 20 percent, about 10 times as much.
To make sure they didn’t overuse the same technology, Koehl and his colleagues tested a variety, from two different hybrids, in a different part of the state. “
We wanted to make sure that the farmers knew the difference between the different kinds of technology they were using, so we didn’t do any testing on the hybrid or conventional systems,” Kuehn said.
To make sure they didn’t overuse the same technology, Koehl and his colleagues tested a variety, from two different hybrids, in a different part of the state.
The farmers were asked to grow a variety that produced nitrous Oxide (N3O) and Nitrous Oxides (N4O) fertilizers and one that produced the same types of fertilizers.
The hybrid systems produced a lot more N3O and N4O fertilizers than the conventional systems.
“There’s a lot of uncertainty with this, because these crops are not very good candidates for using the technology,” Koeshn said, “but this study shows that if you use the same techniques that have proven to be very good for other crops, they can do a better job.”
For instance, the researchers found that using the hybrid systems to produce nitrous-oxides and N2 and N3Os produced about 40 percent more nitrous oxidizers than conventional systems, and about 30 percent more N5O oxidizers.
“That’s a big difference,” Kueshn said of the results.
“So it seems like a lot easier to switch to this system, but we have to test this more thoroughly.”
He added that the technology is still in development and there are still some unknowns.
“But we know that using a hybrid system increases yields by about 40 to 50 percent and reduces nitrogen oxides and nitrous compounds in the fertilizer, which means that farmers are getting more yield out of their plants than they were before.”