Government Promoting Nano-Fertilizer
Kartavya Desk Staff
Syllabus: Agriculture
Source: IE
Context: The Government of India is promoting nano DAP as a cost-effective, indigenous alternative to the imported granular form of di-ammonium phosphate (DAP), especially for Punjab’s Rabi season crops.
What is Nano DAP?
It is cheaper and easier to transport, with a 500 ml bottle costing Rs 600 covering one acre, compared to granular DAP’s Rs 1,350 per 50 kg bag. However, Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) scientists have raised concerns, reporting lower wheat yields when using nano DAP. IFFCO, which developed nano DAP (in liquid form), recommends using it alongside granular DAP for optimal results.
What are Nano-fertilizers?
Nano-fertilizers are advanced fertilizers engineered using nanotechnology to improve nutrient delivery to plants. They contain nutrients in nano-sized particles, which allows for better absorption, efficient use, and reduced environmental impact compared to conventional fertilizers.
Examples: Some examples of nano-fertilizers include nanoparticles of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium, as well as combinations of these nutrients with other elements such as iron or zinc.
Benefits of Nano-Fertilizers:
Category | Benefits of Nano-Fertilizers
To Farmers | Reduction in Input Costs: A 500 ML bottle of Nano DAP costs around Rs 600, half the price of a 50-kg DAP bag (Rs 1,350-1,400).
Higher Crop Yields: Nano fertilizers increase yields by 8%, improving crop quality through better nutrition (IFFCO).
Increase in Farmer Income: Reduced costs and higher yields lead to better income.
To Environment | Better Nutrient Use Efficiency (NUE): Over 85% efficiency, with plants absorbing nitrogen better due to nano-sized particles.
Less Environmental Fallout: Reduces soil, water, and air pollution, cutting fertilizer use by 50% and minimizing nutrient waste.
To Government | Lower Subsidies: Promotes cost savings by cutting subsidies on non-urea fertilizers.
Decreasing Imports: Nano urea production aims to reduce dependence on urea imports, with planned production equivalent to 20 million tonnes of urea by FY25.
Current limitations and challenges associated with the implementation of nano fertilizers:
• Not a complete replacement: Nano urea only replaces top dressing, not basal application, limiting efficiency benefits.
• True yield concerns: The predicted yield increase is 3-16%, but lower actual gains could reduce income benefits.
• Costing issues: Nano urea lacks subsidy support, raising questions about its pricing compared to conventional urea.
• Potential toxicity: Nanoparticles may harm soil organisms and pose risks to human health.
• Uncertain long-term effects: Impacts on soil health, microbial activity, and potential water contamination remain unclear.
Farmers may need to make significant changes to their practices in order to incorporate nano-fertilizers, which could result in additional costs and learning curves.
Conclusion:
While nano-fertilizers offer exciting possibilities for improving the sustainability and productivity of agriculture, their implementation is still faced with several limitations and challenges that must be addressed in order to fully realize their potential.
Insta lInk:
• India’s first Nano DAP Plant
Mains Link:
What are the different types of agriculture subsidies given to farmers at the national and at state levels? Critically, analyse the agricultural subsidy regime with reference to the distortions created by it. (UPSC 2013)
Prelims Link:
With reference to chemical fertilizers in India, consider the following statements: (USPC 2020)
• At present, the retail price of chemical fertilizers is market-driven and not administered by the Government.
• Ammonia, which is an input of urea, is produced from natural gas.
• Sulphur, which is a raw material for phosphoric acid fertilizer, is a by-product of oil refineries.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only (b) 2 and 3 only (c) 2 only (d) 1, 2 and 3
Ans: (b)