6401;; 197'. Economic Analysis of Trickle Distribution Systems Texas High Plains tural Experiment Station ‘wr niversity System ifexas Contents Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Methods and Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Study Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . 4 Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Movable-Surface Trickle Distribution Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Automated Subsurface Trickle Distribution Systems . . . . . . . . . 4 Furrow System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Economic Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Cost-Return Budgets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Break-Even Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Investment in Distribution Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Irrigation Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Cotton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Sorghum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Break-Even Prices Per Unit of Output . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Solid Cotton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Double-Row Cotton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Solid Sorghum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Double-Row Sorghum . ._ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . 10 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 11 Appendix Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 S u m mary The Texas High Plains is a major agricultural producing area that is using irrigation to increase production. The source of water for irrigation is a finite supply in an enclosed aquifer. This supply will be exhausted in the future. I Trickle irrigation has been developed which could extend the life of the ground water by increasing the efficiency of water use. Fifteen trickle distribution systems were evaluated in this study. Three of the systems were movable surface systems, and twelve were automated subsurface systems. Furrow distribution systems are the conventional methods, and a furrow distribution system was included in the analysis. The systems were evaluated for producing cotton and sorghum in solid and double-row planting methods. Estimated investment ranged from $49.19 to $60.61 per acre for the movable surface systems. For automated subsurface systems, estimated investment requirements per acre ranged from $562.57 to $1,860.17. In- vestment requirements per acre for the furrow distribution system was estimated to be $62.74. The lowest estimated costs per acre for cotton for the movable trickle distribution systems were $36.39, $35.37 for the furrow system and $97.48 for the automated subsurface trickle systems. For sorghum, the lowest estimated costs per acre were $34.20 and $122.80 for the furrow 4nd auto- mated subsurface systems, respectively. Break-even prices for the furrow systems were less than any of the trickle systems for cotton. The break-even price for the furrow system was only $.00l less per pound than some of the movable surface systems. Break-even prices for automated subsurface trickle systems were higher than similar calculations for furrow systems. The results were similar for sorghum. major source of water for irrigation in as High Plains is ground water. Ground Us being mined from an aquifer in the area Ithe Ogallala which is geologically iso- f om major sources of recharge. fe furrow irrigation system is the tra- l method for applying irrigation water in as High Plains. Currently, 78 percent of ‘eage in the region is irrigated by furrow The application efficiency for furrow is in this region has been estimated to be v50 percent (l). ; kle (drip) irrigation is a method for dis- M: water that has been demonstrated to fie efficiency when compared to other of distribution. Water is distributed small quantities through orifices. With lace systems, evaporation and seepage iii-reduced. economic benefits accruing from irri- i1 rop production to the economy of the jigh Plains may be extended into the fu- a more efficient system of distribution. from research have shown that less l? required for trickle irrigation than for igation systems to produce comparable ‘lds. Therefore, the withdrawal rate of ii‘- the Ogallala aquifer might be re- us, increasing the number of years that iuld be available for irrigation from the A major purpose of this study was to 1 e the economic feasibility for using igation in the production of row crops. fly, professor, Texas A&M University-Texas Tech Cooperative Research Unit, Lubbock; research §The Texas Agricultural Experiment Station (De- Q0! Agricultural Economics); associate professor, or, The Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, l ECONQMIC ANALYSIS oF TRICKLE DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS TEXAS HIGH PLAINS James E. Osborn, Alan M. Young Otto C. Wilke, and Charles Wendt* The overall objective of this study was to de- termine the economic feasibility of trickle distri- bution systems in cotton and sorghum produc- tion in the Texas High Plains. More specifically. the objectives were l. To determine input-output requirements inothe production of cotton and sorghum by using trickle and furrow distribution systems in the Texas High Plains. 2. To determine costs and returns in the production of cotton and sorghum by using trickle and furrow distribution sys- ‘terns in the Texas High Plains. 3. To determine break-even prices for cotton and for sorghum with trickle and furrow distribution systems. Considerable research work has been com- pleted concerning trickle distribution systems in foreign countries, such as Israel, Australia. Mexico, England, Italy, Denmark, and Iapan. Studies of trickle distribution systems have been conducted in many states in the United States including Utah, Hawaii, California, Arizona. Michigan, Florida, and Texas. Few economic studies, however, have been conducted for row crops. Lacewell, Wilke, and Baush completed a study in 1972 on the economic implications of sub-irrigation as compared to furrow systems in cotton (2). Data from the exper- iments at the Texas A&M University Agricultural Research and Extension Center at Lubbock were used to estimate yields, costs, and returns. A conclusion of the study was that before sub- irrigation would be economically feasible in the production of row crops, fixed cost peracre would have to be reduced. Experiments at the Texas A8zM University Research and Extension Center at Lubbock have shown that crop yields using trickle irrigation 3 systems can be high with relatively low levels of water. Water application rates of less than 7-acre inches resulted in yields of nearly 2-1/2 bales of cotton per acre in 1973 (ll). Methods and Materials Study Area The study area included portions of 5 coun- ties in the Texas Panhandle (Bailey, Parmer, Castro, Lamb, and Hale Counties) and is com- posed of approximately 510,000 acres of medium-textured soils (5, 6). The area is rela- tively homogenous with respect to soils. weather, and supply of ground water (Figure 1). Average annual precipitation for the study area from 1963 to 1973 ranged from slightly under 16.0 inches in the northwest portion to more than 19.0 inches in the southeast portion, for an average of 17.44 inches (10). The average growing season for the study area from 1964 to 1973 ranged from 201 days in southeast sections to 187 days in northwest sections, with an average of 197 days (10). Approximately 475,600 acres of cropland are included in the study area, approximately 85 percent of which is irrigated (4, 5). Major crops grown in the area are cotton and sorghum. About 22 percent of the irrigated cropland in the area t was used for cotton and 40 percent for sorghum in 1968. Minor crops in the area include corn, wheat, forage crops, soybeans, castors, and vegetables. Procedures Systems Three movable-surface trickle distribution ‘systems, twelve automated subsurface trickle distribution systems, and one furrow distribu- tion system were evaluated in the study. The trickle distribution systems were designed for pump capacities of 60, 120, and 180 gallons per minute (GPM). Pumping units were based on lift, pumping pressure, and system capacity of the different trickle systems.‘ The furrow distribution system was de- signed for a 700 gallon per minute well. The selected well yield was chosen to be representa- tive for the study area (4). Well depth for all dis- tribution systems was assumed to be 227 feet with a lift of 200 feet (9). ‘Leon New, irrigation specialist with The Texas Agricultural Extension Service, determined the electric submersible motors and pumps for the selected wells. 4 Movable-Surface Trickle Distribution Systy lateral was designed to apply 0.1 ac water in 24 hours (Table 1). Pump cap movable-surface distribution systems were 60, 120, and 180 GPM, respectivel face area irrigated by the three system, 64, and 96 acres, respectively. Automated Subsurface Trickle Distribution Electric controls were used to automate; surface distribution systems. Tensio, were connected to a control box at the control box initiates the pump and op‘ noid valves in the moisture short area. viders alternate the flow of water intoi- erals in the area. l Subsurface systems were designed t erals and emitters which were 12 to l, below the surface. Emitters and later spaced 40 inches apart for subsurface through 9 (Table 1). For subsurface syi through 15, emitters and laterals were s inches apart. Emitters in the designsj inch spacings were designed for rates. Subsurface distribution systems signed for two water application rates ~ 0.1 inch per day), three pump capacities; and 180 gallons per minute), and threej systems from 16 to 96 acres (T; Automated-subsurface distribution were evaluated for solid and double-ro as well as for sorghum. If: _ 4” _-' . Furrow System: The furrow distributionff contained 1,637 feet of underground risers every 200 feet. Twelve joints aluminum pipe which were 20 feet long cluded (4, 7). The well was designed to " proximately 96 acres (3). The irrigation ef was assumed to be 75 percent for furrow tion systems. Economic Analysis Two methods of economic analysi used to evaluate the variables in this stu; Cost-Return Budgets: Cost-return budge developed for cotton and sorghum. Irrigi dryland crop enterprises were included (Tf Representative prices for resources 1975 were used to develop costs of n1 Information for prices of inputs were det .1 through interviews with agricultural in ply firms and custom operators in the stud“ Parmer Castro Hale Study Area Figure 1. Study Area TABLE 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF SELECTED DISTRIBUTION SYSTEMS, TEXAS HIGH PLAINS System Water Pump Size of Number of I Length of Dime i; application capacity design laterals laterals width ’1_. rate per day (inches) (G PM) (acres) (feet) (feet) Movable surface systems _ 1 0.1 6o 32 16 66o I 1,066 2 0.1 120 64 32 660 2,133 3 0.1 16o 96 4s 660 1,600 Automated subsurface systems 4 0.2 6o 16 96o 22o 792i 5 O.1 6O 32 1 ,92O 22O 1,584 6 O.2 12O 32 1,920 22O 1,584 7 I O.1 12O 64 3,840 22O 1,584 I 8 O.2 180 48 2,880 220 2,376 9 O 1 18O 96 5,760 22O 2,376 1O O.2 6O 16 24O 44O 792 11 O.1 6O 32 48O 44O 792 1 2 O 2 1 2O 32 48O 44O 792 1 3 O 1 1 2O 64 960 44O 1 ,584 14 0 2 16o 48 72o 440 2,376 c. 15 o 1 180 96 1 ,440 440 2,376 i} Furrow systems 16 7OO 96 Cost-return budgets were developed for low, av- erage, and high crop yields (Table 3). Three al- ternative price levels were used for crops (Table 4). a Trickle distribution systems were depre- ciated for 15 years. Repair and maintenance for the movable-surface systems were determined by estimating the cost necessary to replace the laterals, emitters, and vinyl hoses every 4 years. The replacement and variable costs were then expressed as a percentage of total investment per acre (Table 5). For the automated-subsurface systems, re- pair and maintenance costs were determined by estimating the cost of cleaning and (or) replacing 4 percent of the emitters per year for each sys- tem. The cleaning, replacement, and other vari- TABLE 2. COTTON AND SORGHUM ENTERPRISES, TEXAS HIGH PLAINS Crop Planting Water ' Distribution pattern applied system (Ac. ln.) Cotton Solid Dryland I Cotton Sol id 4 Movable-su rface Cotton Sol id 7 Automated-subsurface Cotton Solid 14 Furrow Cotton Double-row 7 Automated-su bsurface Cotton Double-row 14 F urrow Sorghum Solid Dryland I Sorghum Sol id 9 Automated-subsu rface Sorghum Solid 14 Furrow Sorghum Double-row 9 Automated-subsurface Sorghum Double-row 14 Furrow ' Does not apply to dryland production. 6 able costs were expressed as a total investment per acre (Table 5). ytj? g: =3 it . ‘1 .__l Break-Even Analysis: Break-even b) used to evaluate trickle distribution ative to furrow irrigation for the crop Break-even prices with respect to production were determined by specified cost of each crop by the s - TABLE 3. ASSUMED YIELDS FOR COTTON AN i TEXAS HIGH PLAINS i _ _ _ Yields in? Crop Distribution enterprises system Low I ’ Cotton Solid dryland 1 200 Solid irrigated M.S.S.’ 500 I A.S.U.S.3 500 Furrow 500 Double-row irrigation A.S.U.S. 625 I Furrow 625 Sorghum Solid dryland 1 1000 Solid irrigated A.S.U.S. 5000 Furrow 5000 Double-row irrigation A.S.U.S. 5500 Furrow 5500 ' Does not apply to dryland production. zMovable-surface systems. 3Automated subsurface system. ssuMEo PRICES FOR COTTON AND SORGHUM, .5 PLAINS, 1975* Unit Level of prices Low Average High Pound $0.30 $0.40 $0.50 CWt. 4.00 4.50 5 .00 “presentative historical prices in the Texas High Plains, ich included harvest costs, variable irrigation costs, and variable and fixed rtion costs. yesults and Discussion int in Distribution Systems fated investment for the movable- Istribution systems were determined 7f- d Appendix Table A.1). Investment i- ts for the distribution systems ranged ti‘)! for emitters for surface system 1 to or PVC mainline in surface system 3. ated investment requirements were r surface system 1, $3,562.70 for sur- . 2, and $5,818.96 for surface system 3. investment per acre was $49.19, q $60.61 for surface systems 1, 2, and 3, QY- investment for six automated- W distribution systems with 40-inch laterals and emitters was estimated f; Appendix Table A.2). The greatest ygwas estimated for laterals and emit- investment was estimated to range 26.41 for subsurface system 4 to for subsurface system 9. Investment anged from $1,676.65 for subsurface $1,860.17 for subsurface system 9. mponent of automated-subsurface i, systems with 80-inch spacing of lat- imitters which required the greatest ;.W