Effects of a “no tillage” argicultural revolution?

Introduction of no tillage

No- tillage the planting of crops in previously unprepared soil by opening a narrow slot, trench, or band only of sufficient width and depth to obtain proper seed coverage. No other soil preparation is performed . The ploughing system is considered to be an inefficient use of time and fuel and causes much "wear and tear" to the machines. Power requirements for soil tillage are considerable.
In modern agriculture this may be a technical challenge or an economic problem, but formerly this meant hard, long-lasting labour for a large percentage of all the people that ever lived on earth. Forces required are so great that animals were used very early to make the physical stress endurable.

But a small farmer ploughing his field with animal traction has to walk 30 to 40 km behind his plough for each hectare in which he is preparing the soil. Therefore, the reduction of tillage to the minimum necessary to produce a crop, has probably been in the minds of many farmers for a long time. But when the tractor appeared, where effort is reduced because the operator is sitting, the tendency went the other way and farmers started believing that the more tillage you do, the more yield you get. Truth was, that the more tillage you do the more erosion and soil degradation you get, especially in warmer areas.


The OTL history of tillage

The plough has been developed in early days of agriculture and was first pulled by man and later by animals. The use of the plough is often mentioned in the Bible and one of the best known citations is "they shall beat their swords into plough shares" (Isaiah 2. V. 4.). But the plough of biblical times had nothing to do with modern ploughs of the 19th century. In those days a plough was nothing else than a branch from a tree that scratched or scarified the soil surface without mixing the soil layers. Ploughs that inverted the soil layers and thus gave a better weed control were not developed until the 17th century.

Only in the 18th and 19th century did ploughs become more and more sophisticated. But it was not until the end of the 18th century that German, Dutch and British developments of this tool led to an almost perfect shape of the mouldboard, that turned the soil by 135° and was very efficient in weed control. It is this plough that avoided famine and death at the end of the 18th century, since it was the only tool that could effectively control quack grass (Agropyron repens), a weed that had spread all over Europe and could not be controlled with "conventional" tools. Because the modern plough saved Europe from famine and poverty it became a symbol of "modern" agriculture and is used as such by many agricultural research institutes, universities, agronomy schools, etc. One of these early ploughs of 1884 is displayed at the agricultural museum of the University of Hohenheim, in Stuttgart, Germany, and in a festival is taken around the city of Hohenheim each year, to commemorate the invention of this implement.

By knowing the history of this tool, it becomes understandable why Europeans and especially Germans are often such fervent advocates of the plough, which has turned to be the most often used symbol of agriculture world- wide. Against this background, the colonial powers took the plough to America, Asia and Africa, where it became an important tool for the development of newly cultivated land. But it took many decades to discover that the same tool that brought food and wealth to Europe, would bring soil erosion and degradation to the warmer environments.

The POD: An early invention of Paraquat.

The invention of the herbicide Paraquat in 1955 in the UNITED KINGDOM was the start of modern no- tillage development in Europe and also world-wide. Paraquat is the trade name for N,N′-dimethyl-4,4′-bipyridinium dichloride,an organic compound with the formula [(C5H4N)2]Cl2.

The key characteristics that distinguish the non-selective contact herbicide paraquat from other active ingredients used in plant protection products are:

  • It kills a wide range of annual grasses and broad-leaved weeds and the tops of established perennial weeds.
  • It is very fast-acting.
  • It is rain-fast within minutes of application.
  • It is partially inactivated upon contact with soil.
These properties led to paraquat being used in the development of no-till farming. Although first synthesized in 1882 by the Austrian chemist Hugo Weidel (1849 – 1899) and his colleague M. Russo (couldn't identify him completly yet) paraquat's herbicidal properties were not recognized until 1955. Now image for a moment that they were discovered, at the same time as the aforementioned German plough of 1884. (Edited that part for clarification)

Does the Chemical Tank become ingraind as the symbol of modern agriculture ? How would such a POD change the world at large ?

Source:
wikipedia
http://www.rolf-derpsch.com/en/no-till/historical-review/
 
Last edited:
Introduction of no tillage

No- tillage the planting of crops in previously unprepared soil by opening a narrow slot, trench, or band only of sufficient width and depth to obtain proper seed coverage. No other soil preparation is performed . The ploughing system is considered to be an inefficient use of time and fuel and causes much "wear and tear" to the machines. Power requirements for soil tillage are considerable.
In modern agriculture this may be a technical challenge or an economic problem, but formerly this meant hard, long-lasting labour for a large percentage of all the people that ever lived on earth. Forces required are so great that animals were used very early to make the physical stress endurable.

But a small farmer ploughing his field with animal traction has to walk 30 to 40 km behind his plough for each hectare in which he is preparing the soil. Therefore, the reduction of tillage to the minimum necessary to produce a crop, has probably been in the minds of many farmers for a long time. But when the tractor appeared, where effort is reduced because the operator is sitting, the tendency went the other way and farmers started believing that the more tillage you do, the more yield you get. Truth was, that the more tillage you do the more erosion and soil degradation you get, especially in warmer areas.


The OTL history of tillage

The plough has been developed in early days of agriculture and was first pulled by man and later by animals. The use of the plough is often mentioned in the Bible and one of the best known citations is "they shall beat their swords into plough shares" (Isaiah 2. V. 4.). But the plough of biblical times had nothing to do with modern ploughs of the 19th century. In those days a plough was nothing else than a branch from a tree that scratched or scarified the soil surface without mixing the soil layers. Ploughs that inverted the soil layers and thus gave a better weed control were not developed until the 17th century.

Only in the 18th and 19th century did ploughs become more and more sophisticated. But it was not until the end of the 18th century that German, Dutch and British developments of this tool led to an almost perfect shape of the mouldboard, that turned the soil by 135° and was very efficient in weed control. It is this plough that avoided famine and death at the end of the 18th century, since it was the only tool that could effectively control quack grass (Agropyron repens), a weed that had spread all over Europe and could not be controlled with "conventional" tools. Because the modern plough saved Europe from famine and poverty it became a symbol of "modern" agriculture and is used as such by many agricultural research institutes, universities, agronomy schools, etc. One of these early ploughs of 1884 is displayed at the agricultural museum of the University of Hohenheim, in Stuttgart, Germany, and in a festival is taken around the city of Hohenheim each year, to commemorate the invention of this implement.

By knowing the history of this tool, it becomes understandable why Europeans and especially Germans are often such fervent advocates of the plough, which has turned to be the most often used symbol of agriculture world- wide. Against this background, the colonial powers took the plough to America, Asia and Africa, where it became an important tool for the development of newly cultivated land. But it took many decades to discover that the same tool that brought food and wealth to Europe, would bring soil erosion and degradation to the warmer environments.

The POD: An early invention of Paraquat.

The invention of the herbicide Paraquat in 1955 in the UNITED KINGDOM was the start of modern no- tillage development in Europe and also world-wide. Paraquat is the trade name for N,N′-dimethyl-4,4′-bipyridinium dichloride,an organic compound with the formula [(C5H4N)2]Cl2.

The key characteristics that distinguish the non-selective contact herbicide paraquat from other active ingredients used in plant protection products are:

  • It kills a wide range of annual grasses and broad-leaved weeds and the tops of established perennial weeds.
  • It is very fast-acting.
  • It is rain-fast within minutes of application.
  • It is partially inactivated upon contact with soil.
These properties led to paraquat being used in the development of no-till farming. Although first synthesized in 1882 by the Austrian chemist Hugo Weidel (1849 – 1899) and his colleague M. Russo (couldn't identify him completly yet) paraquat's herbicidal properties were not recognized until 1955. Now image for a moment that they were discovered, at the same time as the plough.

Does the Chemical Tank become ingraind as the symbol of modern agriculture ? How would such a POD change the world at large ?

Source:
wikipedia
http://www.rolf-derpsch.com/en/no-till/historical-review/

You have to get the World's chemistry skills up to that level. Probably to 1930s levels to get industrial scale production going.

ASB to get that before plows.
 
Allow me to echo the ASB sentiment, as it and the precursors used to make paraquat only really be made in quantity with an industrial chemical base. If you want paraquat arising at the same time as the plow, you're going to have to hand-wave a natural source of the stuff. Which would probably be a dangerous occupation, as paraquat's toxic to humans as well if ingested, and if you're harvesting it by hand in quantity there's a not-insubstantial chance you will accidentally ingest some.

Which begs the question of, even if there was some kind of naturally occurring source of the stuff that neolithic man can domesticate, would neolithic man even bother? As it would take a run of luck for it to get a reputation as anything other than a poison for men and beast. And mankind traditionally hasn't expended large amounts of energy harvesting/extracting things whose primary usage would be as a poison.
 
Now THIS is the sort of AH I love, hidden between all the "suppose this general did that" stuff.

My first thought is probably a lot of people's - no Dust Bowl. That would change the tenor of 1930s America, probably in favour of technocrats rather than populism.
 
While I agree that it would take some time to scale up/commercialize the discovery I have a hard time seeing how this would take them 50 years to do so (1880-1930).As explained in my initial post, they really had a huge problem with weed, so the value of a “chemical plow” should be obvious. Germany also had a fast growing chemical industry at the time, and some of the worlds best researcher. Surely one of them will be able to figure out a way to mass produce the stuff.
A more reasonable time span would probably something around 20 year, so that at the turn of the century Bayer, BAS and other are churning out paraquat en masse. During this time they have probably enough time and material to test the stuff on small experimental fields/garden. This should still have a huge effect on the remaining century and lead to some interesting discussions.
 
While I agree that it would take some time to scale up/commercialize the discovery I have a hard time seeing how this would take them 50 years to do so (1880-1930).As explained in my initial post, they really had a huge problem with weed, so the value of a “chemical plow” should be obvious. Germany also had a fast growing chemical industry at the time, and some of the worlds best researcher. Surely one of them will be able to figure out a way to mass produce the stuff.
A more reasonable time span would probably something around 20 year, so that at the turn of the century Bayer, BAS and other are churning out paraquat en masse. During this time they have probably enough time and material to test the stuff on small experimental fields/garden. This should still have a huge effect on the remaining century and lead to some interesting discussions.

Because the chemical industry just is not there!

Look at plastics. Nitrocellulose was the only plastic produced until 1897, at which point you get casein based plastics. Then in 1907 you get Bakelite.
then
he period 1930-1940 saw the initial commercial development of today’s major thermoplastics: polyvinyl chloride, low density polyethylene, polystyrene, and polymethyl methacrylate. The advent of World War II in 1939 brought plastics into great demand, largely as substitutes for materials in short supply, such as natural rubber. In the United States, the crash program leading to large-scale production of synthetic rubbers resulted in extensive research into the chemistry of polymer formation and, eventually, to the development of more plastic materials.

You are not going to get tonne lot production of herbicides if you don't have a chemical industry that can produce any thing more plasticky than Bakelite.
 
Top