Drawing nitrogen from air for corn crop

PONTIAC, Ill. — The difference between nitrogen production costs of $3.12 and 4 cents per gallon is lightning in a bottle — literally — for new trials at Precision Technology Institute.

The on-farm green nitrogen plasma technology draws nitrogen from the air and into water where it can then be used for corn production.

The unique technology that could be a game changer in crop production was among the stops at Precision Planting’s PTI field day.

“In a lightning storm, nitrogen is being created in a static electricity field that’s being produced,” said Ethan Mestach, PTI intern.

“Seventy-eight percent of our air is nitrogen. We can’t use that in our corn right now because it’s not in plant-usable form.

“This machine allows us to generate nitrogen from air into a plant-usable form which is liquid.”

The nitrogen production unit features six separate towers inside with electrical currents and water. Lightning is recreated through the process that pulls in nitrogen from the air.

The machine creates about 160 gallons a day. Once the nitrogen is produced in the system, it can be pumped into a larger tank for storage.

“Have you heard when there’s a lightning storm, it’s raining nitrogen? This is the same process,” Mestach said.

First Trials

PTI began trials on this new concept last year after it received the technology in mid-June.

“The cost per gallon to produce traditional 32% UAN that most growers apply is $3.12 per gallon and our cost of producing nitrogen with this system is 4 cents a gallon,” Mestach said.

“The cost of applying 32% UAN at a rate of 225 pounds per acre is $200.20 per acre, compared to $2.28 per acre for applying green nitrogen. That’s a 98.9% reduction in nitrogen costs.”

The homemade versus commercial nitrogen trials compared yield and economics.

The corn averaged 256.8 bushels per acre in the control strips using a typical nitrogen program in 2023, while the corn with 100% green nitrogen applied averaged 252.4 bushels per acre, 4.4 less.

However, from an economic standpoint, the trial with 100% green nitrogen had a $52.64 per acre advantage over the conventional approach with commercial synthetic nitrogen.

Trials were also conducted in an organic production system with similar results.

“A special thing about this, too, is we can foliar apply this. If UAN was foliar-applied it would torch your corn. We can load it up in the spray and apply it. It’s a direct nitrogen shot to the corn,” Mestach said.

“Another thing is with our FurrowJet, which delivers fertilizer in the furrow at planting, you can apply it onto the seed. You never apply nitrogen straight on the seed. It would burn the seed. So, that’s another benefit of using it in FurrowJet and also in Conceal to apply in-furrow.

“I think it’s going to be very beneficial for organic corn producers, too. It’s not your traditional UAN nitrogen that organic growers cannot use.”

Cost, User-Friendly

“One year I was looking at my nitrogen expense on the farm. It was $120 per acre for my corn and I’m thinking, wait a minute, if the air is 78% nitrogen, how come we can’t feed that to our corn? It doesn’t work. It’s not plant-available, but what if we could trick the system and make this thing to work in our favor. That’s what we’re trying to do,” said Jason Webster, PTI director and Precision Planting agronomist.

Webster noted the long-time concern that if nitrogen is spilled on the planter, it would rust the planter bar.

“This product that we make is salt-free. It is not corrosive whatsoever. As a matter of fact, you can open the valve on the planter tank and wash your hands with it. You can even drink it. It doesn’t hurt you. It’s atmospheric nitrogen,” he said.

As with any early studies, there have been some failures.

“I think in our corn-after-corn trial that we’ve got out here where we’re using it as a total replacement for UAN, it didn’t work. Now, once harvest comes around maybe I’ll be surprised. There’s lots of situations where we have base programs down of 60 to 70 pounds of nitrogen and then we come in with this as a foliar, those look great with the sidedress and a foliar,” Webster said.

“I can have a 40-bushel yield loss from the product and I break even compared to my normal nitrogen program. Think about that for a moment. A 40-bushel yield loss and the numbers are the same.

“I also think of this thing as a potential mix in a starter fertilizer program. This stuff is 4 cents a gallon to produce. Just looking at this on the planter in a FurrowJet situation, I don’t need very much yield to pay for 4 cents a gallon. Even though it may not be a real high yield increase, the ROI could be very substantial with it.

“I see this as a mix with other products, in-furrow and foliar.”

There are still some kinks to be worked out in the young technology, particularly with regards to the water used in the system.

“Right now, the technology is not where I want it. I can’t measure the water coming in. I can’t measure it coming out for consistent quality. That was a problem, but I think it’s due to the quality of water coming into it,” Webster said.

“I have high calcium water here in the shop and I keep getting calcium deposits in the towers where the magic’s being made here. So, I set up a reverse osmosis system in order to make sure I have good quality coming out, but we have to remineralize it on the backside and it gets a little complicated for a lot of growers once you start talking that.”

The unit’s cost was $38,000 last year. Webster said with some improvements, he’s been told it will cost $45,000 for a unit that now can produce 200 gallons per day, 40 more than the year-old unit at PTI.