FAQ

Project benchmarks are only available to be used by Fieldprint Projects. A Project Benchmark is the average Fieldprint metric value for all fields within a specific project that share the same scope (such as crop type or irrigation). These benchmarks are more meaningful to growers because they reflect results from others in the same region and project. They are calculated as weighted averages of field-level data, which can be area weighted, or production weighted.

National and state benchmarks take publicly available data from USDA for crop production information related to inputs (nutrients, pesticides), outputs (yield), and we create a production profile based on irrigation type (irrigated, non-irrigated). We average five years of data (2008-2012, inclusive) and estimate the metrics using weighted averages at the national and state level.

The GHG Protocol does not have a mechanism to formally approve tools or models in the sense of a certification, recognition, or endorsement program. However, guidance from the GHG Protocol played a significant role in the development of the Fieldprint Platform Version 5. At a later date, Field to Market will release a report describing how output from SWAT+ can be used to align with GHG Protocol Land Sector and Removals Guidance. For additional context, the “Built on GHG Protocol” recognition was officially closed on August 13, 2024.

SWAT+ can simulate processes such as soil carbon dynamics, surface runoff, infiltration, evapotranspiration, groundwater flow, sediment transport, and nutrient cycling. When coupled with additional calibration and validation against observed data, it aligns with the IPCC’s definition of a Tier 3 methodology. Tier 3 models are characterized by their comprehensive approaches, disaggregation of activity data, and the use of the latest scientific knowledge to provide granular estimates of variables of interest such as greenhouse gas emissions and removals.

By the end of 2025, Fieldprint Platform V5 will incorporate the SWAT+ model, which Colorado State University will validate to simulate soil organic carbon (SOC) dynamics in the U.S. Corn Belt. This model validation effort focuses on cropping systems that include corn, soybeans, and wheat, among other crops, which collectively comprise 92% of the Field to Market’s project acres. The SWAT+ model implementation by CSU will provide a calibrated model service with localized weather, soil properties, and crop growth modules. Modeling of SOC dynamics for other crops and/or regions outside the Midwest will rely on parameters from the USDA ARS National Agroecosystems Model, built-in parameters, and parameters from the scientific literature. Model uncertainty quantification will be provided for crops and regions with sufficient data.

The model output from SWAT+ should be considered sufficient for Scope 3 reporting.
Generation of carbon credits by SWAT+ is not currently supported.

See Table 4, Fieldprint Platform v5 Sources, using this documentation webpage. The soil carbon stock changes component is a positive value (sources) when emissions are estimated, and a negative value (sinks) when the model estimates carbon sequestration. N2O emissions are not a sink; the model always estimates some N2O emissions. N2O emissions are highly influenced by applications of synthetic fertilizer and manure, and by crop residue amounts after crop harvest. N2O emissions are attributed to the crop that received the nutrient applications.

The manure rate and content are highly important data points to collect. You can learn more about the manure inputs on this documentation webpage.

As of now, the platform requires the user to enter two separate application trips for this process. We are looking into a way to indicate the activities were done in one trip. For now, we have established an alternative that does not significantly contribute to an increase in the energy use score.

Complete the fertilizer activity information needed. Add a spraying operation activity on the same date as the fertilizer application activity. Set the fuel usage for the spraying operation activity to 0.

This alternative can also be used if there is a planting pass with starter fertilizer, a tillage pass with a fertilizer application, or a cover crop planting with a fertilizer application. In these cases, the fertilizer application fuel amount would be set to 0.

The platform is set up to handle these activities. The relay or double crop should be assigned its own crop interval. The crop can be spring killed via a termination operation in the chisel/plow category (look for “vegetation is killed” description when you hover over a tillage option with the mouse pointer).

Cover crops that are harvested for grain/forage should be treated as cash crops in the Platform as there is an economic gain. They can follow the same data entry process as double crops.

We recommend leaving the pre-fill value for seeding rates. For grain systems, the upstream impact of seeding rates is low. Impact factors for seeding inputs were estimated on a kg basis for energy use and emissions.

Not currently. If there are multiple irrigation water sources within a crop interval, the power source must be the same across all sources. For example, if a field was irrigated with groundwater and surface water, the power source for each must match (e.g. electricity and electricity, or diesel and diesel).

Similarly, if one source used power, the other cannot be left blank (indicating gravity-fed water).

We recommend using the aerial application. The diesel usage should be updated to an equivalent value for electricity or fuel consumption of the drone. The energy use of the drone is not 0 but it’s likely much lower than the fuel consumption of an agricultural plane. For specific fuel use recommendations, please reach out via our support email.