New model optimizes corn growth in Agrivoltaics farms

Aug 21, 2024
By Jean-Paul McDonald
Assistant Editor, North American Content, Farms.com

Researchers develop a novel model to improve corn yield and power production

Researchers from Purdue University have developed a new model designed to enhance corn growth in agrivoltaic farms, where solar panels and crops share the same land.

This innovative approach combines agricultural production systems with solar energy, offering a sustainable solution that could benefit both food production and renewable energy.

The research team introduced a novel spatiotemporal shadow distribution (SSD) model, which aims to optimize crop yield and solar power generation.

The SSD model considers the shadows cast by photovoltaic (PV) panels, allowing farmers to assess and adjust farming practices for better outcomes. This model was validated using data from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and calibrated against field measurements taken at an agrivoltaic farm in West Lafayette, Indiana.

The field experiment at Purdue University featured two types of PV panel arrangements: 300 W modules placed side by side and 100 W modules in an alternate checkerboard pattern. These panels were installed on single-axis trackers at a height of 6.1 meters and were tested from April to October 2020.

The researchers observed that corn yields from the area without PV panels were slightly higher at 10,955 kg/ha compared to 10,182 kg/ha in the PV area. The SSD model closely aligned with these results, predicting 10,856 kg/ha for the no-PV area and 10,102 kg/ha for the agrivoltaic area.

Further analysis revealed that factors such as tracker height, distance between PV arrays, and panel angle could influence corn yield.

For instance, lowering the tracker height to 2.44 meters did not significantly impact the overall yield but increased variability between rows. The team also discovered that anti-tracking (AT) around solar noon could boost corn yield by 5.6%, though this would reduce solar power output.

This new model and its findings are detailed in the paper "Optimizing corn agrivoltaic farming through farm-scale experimentation and modeling," published in Cell Reports Sustainability. The research also involved collaboration with academics from Denmark's Aarhus University.

This development marks a significant step forward in combining agriculture and renewable energy, offering a promising solution to meet the growing global demands for food and clean energy.

Video: The 15-Year Bet Behind Every New Variety!

Canada is trying to decide how much agricultural research capacity it can afford to lose. Brian Rossnagel believes the better question is whether the country can afford to rebuild it.

The longtime barley and oat breeder makes the case with a simple fact about his profession: the consequences of today’s decisions may not become visible for 10 or 15 years.

“Pick the right parents. That’s the biggest thing,” Rossnagel says. “If you pick the wrong parents, you’re not going to get anywhere—and you don’t know that until 10 years, 15 years later.”

That warning carries particular weight as Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada moves to reduce spending and streamline parts of its science operations. The department’s 2026–27 plan anticipates the loss of approximately 665 positions by 2028–29 and says some research will be reduced where capacity exists in academia or industry. AAFC says the changes will make its science operations more cost-effective over the long term.

For Canada’s seed industry, Rossnagel’s career illustrates what is at stake.

This fall, the retired University of Saskatchewan breeder will be inducted into the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame. During his 35-year career at the Crop Development Centre, he helped develop more than 100 barley and oat varieties, including CDC Austenson—one of Western Canada’s most widely grown feed barleys. His induction recognizes not only those varieties, but the collaboration and research system that made them possible.

Rossnagel is quick to emphasize that none of it was the work of one person.

“The first thing I thought about was all the other people who contributed to whatever success I and my program had over the years,” he says. “We know that it’s not an individual who does this. It’s a group—a team.”

That team extends well beyond the breeder whose name appears beside a variety. It includes technicians, pathologists, quality specialists, statisticians, regional testing sites, seed growers and industry partners. It also includes the breeders who came before and those who will carry the germplasm forward.

CDC Fraser barley, for example, moved through three breeding careers. Its parents came from Brian Harvey’s program. Rossnagel advanced the material after Harvey retired, and Aaron Beattie later guided it through registration and release.

That kind of handoff is normal in plant breeding. The person who makes the original cross may never see the resulting variety reach farmers.

It also explains why lost research capacity cannot simply be switched back on when budgets improve.

“If you shut it off, it’s very, very difficult—and particularly costly—to start it up again,” Rossnagel says. “If you have to start from scratch, it’s going to be at least 10 years before anybody notices whether you’re getting anything done or not.”

The concern is not simply how many experimental lines Canada can process. Modern equipment, statistical tools and genetic technologies allow today’s breeding programs to evaluate tens of thousands of lines—far more than Rossnagel could handle when he entered the field in the early 1970s.

But efficiency and automation do not generate every idea.

“If you pare back down, and instead of having six or seven individual scientists concentrating on wheat breeding, you go down and say three people could handle all this, well, that’s half the ideas gone,” he says. “Particularly if you happen to lose the three people who had the really neat and innovative ideas, boy, that’s a problem.”

It is a timely distinction for Canadian agriculture. Consolidating programs may preserve the volume of material moving through a system, at least initially. It may not preserve the diversity of thinking, regional knowledge or willingness to pursue unconventional crosses.

That regional knowledge matters because Canadian agriculture is not one uniform production environment. A variety suited to southern Alberta may face different disease, moisture and maturity pressures than one grown in Manitoba, Ontario or Atlantic Canada.

“Agriculture is applied biology,” Rossnagel says. “Biology, all around the Earth, moves from the poles to the equator. It does not move from Newfoundland to B.C. like politics do.”