journalfront

Agriculture

Corteva Launches Kyber Pro & Sonic Boom Soybean Herbicides in 2025

2024-11-20

Soybean farmers are constantly on the lookout for effective solutions to combat herbicide-resistant weeds. In 2025, they will have two exciting new options from Corteva. These herbicides promise to address the challenges posed by weeds like waterhemp and Palmer amaranth. Let's delve into the details of Kyber Pro and Sonic Boom herbicides.

Empowering Soybean Farmers with Advanced Weed Control

Kyber Pro: A Tri-Action Herbicide

Kyber Pro herbicide stands out with its unique combination of three modes of action. Metribuzin, flumioxazin, and pyroxasulfone work together to provide control over more than 50 broadleaf and grass weeds. This includes those hard-to-control and resistant varieties such as Palmer amaranth and waterhemp. With up to six weeks of residual activity, it offers long-lasting protection. It can be easily tank-mixed and applied with burndown herbicides before planting or combined with other preemergence herbicides. The liquid premix formulation simplifies in-season mixing, handling, and storage, making it a convenient choice for farmers.

Not only does Kyber Pro control a wide range of weeds, but it also gives soybean farmers an additional tool in their arsenal. Its diverse modes of action help to overcome the limitations of single-action herbicides and provide more comprehensive weed control. This is especially crucial in the face of the shifting weed control landscape.

Sonic Boom: Broadleaf Weed Control with Flexibility

Sonic Boom herbicide offers two effective modes of action - metribuzin and sulfentrazone. These act against troublesome weeds like waterhemp, Palmer amaranth, marestail, and kochia. It provides several weeks of residual weed control, ensuring that the weeds are kept in check throughout the growing season. The liquid premix formulation allows for tank mix flexibility, enabling farmers to customize their weed control programs.

Sonic Boom can be applied in different timings, such as fall or spring burndown, preplant, or preemergence. This versatility gives farmers the freedom to choose the most suitable application time based on their specific farming conditions. It is a valuable addition to the arsenal of soybean farmers, helping them to manage weeds more effectively.

Both Kyber Pro and Sonic Boom herbicides have received federal registration and are in the process of obtaining state registrations. Kyber Pro is currently available for purchase in states where it has been registered, while Sonic Boom is expected to be available in early 2025. Farmers are encouraged to reach out to their local Corteva representative or visit the Kyber Pro and Sonic Boom websites to learn more about these innovative herbicides and how they can benefit their soybean crops.

At Corteva, we understand the importance of helping soybean growers overcome the challenges posed by weeds. Kyber Pro and Sonic Boom herbicides are designed to provide diverse modes of action and several weeks of residual control in convenient premix formulations. With these new options, soybean farmers can take a step forward in their weed control efforts and ensure the health and productivity of their crops.

An Iowa-based company has taken a significant step by resubmitting its permit application for a carbon dioxide pipeline to South Dakota regulators. This move comes after a year of setbacks and opposition. The company claims to have incorporated valuable input from landowners and local officials during extensive negotiations.

"Iowa Company's Pipeline Initiative in South Dakota - A Balanced Approach"

Project Details

Summit Carbon Solutions plans to capture carbon dioxide produced during ethanol production, liquefy it, and transport it via pipeline to North Dakota for sequestration. This process could earn the company billions in federal tax credits. The latest South Dakota route spans 700 miles with connections to 14 ethanol plants, including a proposed sustainable aviation fuel plant. Overall, the $9 billion pipeline would reach 2,500 miles with connections to 57 ethanol plants in five states. A Tuesday news release highlighted potential uses of the captured carbon, such as green methanol, water treatment, food processing, and dry ice production.

However, the sequestration area near North Dakota's oilfields has faced criticism. Opponents allege that some of the carbon dioxide could be used for enhanced oil recovery. Summit's website insists the pipeline will not be used for this purpose, but during a 2023 permit hearing in Iowa, the chief operations officer acknowledged it as a possibility. This has raised concerns among landowners and others worried about potential leaks of toxic carbon dioxide plumes.

Lawsuits Pending, Legislation Possible

The project is politically charged in South Dakota. Fourteen incumbent state legislators lost in the June primary election, and their support for a controversial pipeline law was a factor. Legislators and the governor approved the law last winter, aiming for a balanced approach. Opponents attacked a portion that would have required counties to prove their siting laws reasonable. They also gathered petition signatures and forced the law onto the November ballot, where 59% of voters rejected it.

Summit aims to start construction in 2026 and begin operations in 2027. State regulators will review the new application in the coming months, which could overlap with legislative action. Many new South Dakota legislators oppose the potential use of eminent domain. In August, the South Dakota Supreme Court ruled that Summit had not yet proven its status as a "common carrier," sending the lawsuits back to lower courts where the company will try to prove its case.

Pasture, Rangeland, and Forage Rainfall Index Insurance (PRF-RI) stands as an underappreciated insurance product within the Midwest's livestock and forage production sector. As highlighted in the Farmdoc Daily article from Oct. 9, 2024, one distinctive feature of PRF-RI is that producers have the autonomy to select the months they wish to insure against low rainfall. This flexibility enables the safeguarding of various forage production systems that thrive at different times throughout the year. Enrolling in different months throughout the year not only influences the total premium paid by producers but also determines the amount and frequency of indemnities received and, ultimately, the extent to which forage production risk is managed.

Secure Your Forage Production with PRF-RI

Background: Unraveling the Determinants of PRF-RI Premiums

The USDA Risk Management Agency (RMA) sets PRF-RI insurance premiums with the aim of achieving actuarial fairness. Over time, the indemnities paid out from PRF-RI are intended to approximately equal the premiums collected. Premiums typically rise as the frequency and magnitude of indemnity payments increase. Consequently, PRF-RI premiums vary based on factors such as the per-acre value insured, the selected two-month intervals, and the chosen coverage levels. These factors impact both the size and likelihood of an indemnity payment. PRF-RI is subsidized, meaning that producer-paid premiums (premium less subsidy) are generally lower than indemnities on average. The subsidy levels depend on the coverage level selected, with 70% and 75% policies receiving a 59% premium subsidy, 80% and 85% policies getting 55%, and 90% policies receiving 51%.In Illinois, Figure 1 presents the average producer-paid premiums for two PRF-RI intended uses in 2024: hay (non-irrigated, conventional) and grazing. For each use, premiums are shown for 90% and 85% coverage levels, with variations based on two-month intervals. Dryland hay generally has higher premiums per acre compared to grazing due to the higher value of production and the increased total value of protection. Higher coverage levels also lead to higher premiums due to the greater probability of an indemnity being triggered and the higher value of protection. The differences in premium amounts among two-month intervals result from variations in rainfall variability. Months with higher variability, such as January/February, September/October, and November/December, have higher premiums due to the increased likelihood of an indemnity payment.

Exploring PRF-RI Interval Enrollment Strategies

From a pure profit-maximization perspective, some may suggest enrolling in months with the highest rainfall variability to leverage the subsidy and maximize the chance of receiving an indemnity. In Illinois, these high variability intervals are typically January/February, September/October, and November/December, although the specific intervals may vary by location. However, when considering such a strategy, one must also take into account the overall risk related to rainfall and forage production. If a lack of rainfall in these highly variable months has minimal impact on forage growth, enrolling only in those months may increase the risk of not receiving an indemnity when forage growth is lost.To illustrate this, the PRF-RI decision tool was used to outline the outcomes of two potential enrollment strategies. The "Profit Maximization" strategy involves spreading the percentage of value insured across the three intervals with the highest rainfall variability in Illinois: 33% in January/February, 33% in September/October, and 34% in November/December. The "Risk Management" strategy, on the other hand, distributes the percentage of value across intervals coinciding with the typical Midwest growing season: 33% in March/April, 33% in May/June, and 34% in July/August. It is important to note that these strategies are for illustrative purposes only and may not be the optimal choices for all producers or locations. By exploring the PRF-RI policy outcomes using Grid ID 24168 in Champaign County for non-irrigated and conventional hay production at a 90% coverage level, it was found that the "Profit Maximization" strategy led to a higher average indemnity of $50/acre compared to $38/acre for the "Risk Management" strategy. Additionally, the 2025 premiums were higher for the "Profit Maximization" strategy due to the higher expected indemnity. When considering premiums and subsidies, the "Profit Maximization" strategy resulted in an average net gain of $19/acre for producers, while the "Risk Management" strategy yielded an average net gain of $13/acre.PRF-RI is designed to provide risk protection against the loss of forage growth due to low rainfall. Therefore, it is crucial to examine how much risk each strategy manages. Table 1 shows the correlation coefficient between indemnities each year and the Illinois state-level average hay yield. Correlation coefficients range from -1 to 1, with values further from zero indicating a stronger correlation. For the "Profit Maximization" strategy, the correlation between indemnities and state-level hay yields is close to zero, suggesting that there is little relationship between the indemnities and hay yields. In contrast, the "Risk Management" strategy indemnities are more correlated, with a coefficient of -0.4. This indicates that when an indemnity occurs from the "Risk Management" strategy, it is likely to occur in years with low yields. Another way to assess this is by examining the outcomes in a particularly low yield year, such as 2012, which was one of the worst drought years in recent history. During 2012, the "Profit Maximization" strategy provided a $50/acre indemnity, while the "Risk Management" strategy offered more than double that amount at $116/acre. This highlights the importance of selecting months that align with when rainfall is beneficial for forage growth to provide better risk protection.

PRF-RI Interval Enrollment in Illinois

Figure 2 depicts the proportion of Illinois grazing and dryland hay acreage enrolled in each two-month interval in 2024. The two most popular intervals for both types of forage are August/September and November/December. However, there is significant variation, with coverage placed in all intervals.

Concluding Thoughts

Livestock and forage producers should seriously consider PRF-RI. Overall, the use of PRF-RI offers a means to reduce the risk associated with inadequate rainfall in forage and hay production. Due to premium subsidies, indemnity payments should exceed the producer-paid premium over time. The "best" enrollment strategy for a producer depends on their risk aversion preferences, overall risk exposure from a lack of rainfall, types of forage systems, and other factors. Producers are encouraged to utilize the USDA RMA's interactive decision tool for PRF-RI to explore policy options and historical outcomes and find the policy that best meets their specific needs.For those new to enrolling in PRF-RI, the enrollment deadline for the 2025 year is December 1, 2024. PRF-RI insurance can be purchased through any authorized crop insurance agent, and the premium payment deadline is September 1 of the following year, so premiums do not need to be paid upfront.