Costs and Benefits of Implementing Sensor-controlled Irrigation in a Commercial Pot-in-Pot Container Nursery

Abstract

Irrigation scheduling in ornamental plant production is complex due to the large number of species grown by individual growers and the need to consider plant, environment, and substrate conditions to make correct irrigation decisions on a daily or more frequent basis. The engineering team in our project has developed a smart wireless sensor node that is capable of integrating outputs from a range of soil moisture and environmental sensors to schedule irrigation events. In addition, an advanced monitoring and control software enables growers to manage irrigation based on set-point or model-based protocols, which are then independently executed by the nodes, enhancing or replacing human decision making. During 2012, we implemented a sensor-controlled vs. grower-controlled irrigation study at a pot-in-pot nursery in Tennessee. Sensor networks were installed in two separate production blocks of 3-year-old dogwood (Cornus florida ‘Cherokee Brave’) and 2-year-old red maple (Acer rubrum ‘Autumn Blaze’) trees grown in 15- and 30-gal containers, respectively. One row of trees in each block was irrigated based on the average reading of soil moisture sensors inserted in individual trees using micropulse irrigation, i.e., sensor controlled. Trees in the adjacent row and the rest of the block were independently irrigated by the grower using standard practices, i.e., grower controlled. Sensor volumetric water content (VWC) readings and irrigation volumes were logged by nodes on a 15-min basis and were relayed to a base station on the farm. For the study period between Mar. 2012 and Nov. 2012, average daily water applied by the grower-controlled irrigation to the dogwood block was 0.92 gal/tree, compared with 0.34 gal/tree applied using sensor-controlled irrigation; for red maple, these values were 1.72 gal/tree and 1.13 gal/tree, respectively. No significant differences in tree caliper or quality were noted between the two irrigation treatments in either species over the year. The cost of water for this particular operation was negligible consisting only of pumping costs, as water is drawn from a perennial stream with excellent water quality. Consequently, a conservative return on investment for a wireless sensor network capable of covering the entire operation was 37.5%, corresponding to a payback period of 2.7 years, associated almost entirely from a reduction in irrigation management time. Pricing in a nominal cost for water of $326 per acre-foot ($1 per 1000 gal) increased annualized net savings 9-fold, reducing the payback period to less than 4 months. This analysis did not factor in additional economic benefits such as reductions in production time, losses due to disease, or increased plant quality, which have been associated with the use of sensor-based irrigation control in other studies.