5 ms·
My understanding is that many farms in the midwest (as least corn farms) don't irrigate - rainfall is sufficient. Linear and circular systems should in princip
by icegreentea2 6y ago
My understanding is that many farms in the midwest (as least corn farms) don't irrigate - rainfall is sufficient.
Linear and circular systems should in principle be able to achieve the same water efficiency (within their swept area). They're the same thing - an above ground wheeled mechanism to deposit water.
If you're farming in an area where you're water constrained, then you might not necessarily care about parts of your field not being used (as long as it's reasonably small), since what you care about is your input to output cost.
Some advantages of central pivot is that: a) you only need to feed water to a single fixed point - in a linear system you either need a ditch to draw out of (that's water loss right there), or drag a hose around (that's a possible point of failure) b) you don't need to figure out how to regulate the two ends of your line to keep them in line.
- dbcurtis 6y agoExactly right on rain being the determining factor. In NE Iowa and SE Minnesota, where I am from, it is one of the most drought-resistant areas of farm land in the nation. No one would waste dollar-one on an irrigation system. (Getting 4 rainless days in a row so that you can bale hay is a bigger issue). As you go west, the influence of the Rocky Mountain rain shadow takes on increasing importance. About half way across SoDak or Nebraska, center-pivot irrigation starts to pencil out.