Growing agriculture's energy future

What did we do?

We  conducted an exploratory study where approximately 50 Victorian farmers were interviewed from the dairy, horticulture, and pig and poultry sectors. The interviews explored the importance of energy management across different Victorian farm contexts; identified a range of actions farmers have implemented to manage their energy use, costs and risks; unpacked the different influences that impact on their energy decision-making; and provided an opportunity for farmers to express what future support Agriculture Victoria can provide to help realise their ambitions related to energy.

‍

Key findings

Importance of energy to farm management

The majority of farmer interviewees engaged in a highly deliberative decision-making process when it comes to managing their energy use, costs and risks, irrespective of the sector, location or whether they had engaged in the AEIP (through a previous energy audit or grant) or not.

For most interviewees, energy was an important part in their overall farm decision-making context, and could recount in detail what activities they think the most about when it comes to managing their energy.

Even if energy represented a relatively small part of their overall costs or turnover, interviewees placed considerable value on being efficient and reducing costs wherever they can.

Energy actions

When looking at the different actions that interviewees had implemented to manage their energy use, costs and risks, we observed differences between sectors and AEIP versus non-AEIP participants, highlighting the importance of context in shaping these decisions.

For dairy interviewees, there was an emphasis on equipment installations and upgrades to the dairy – milk vats, chillers, heat reclamation systems, variable speed drives (VSDs), solar panels, LEDs, back-up generators, and computer-controlled systems. Fuel efficient vehicle upgrades were also mentioned, as well as running equipment during the off-peak and using energy brokers to secure better deals. Many of these actions were common between AEIP and non-AEIP interviewees, although our impression (across all sectors) was that those who participated in the AEIP invested in more of these actions, particularly ones that were more expensive and ambitious in delivering energy savings.

Horticulture interviewees shared a number of common energy actions with their dairy counterparts. However, there was a significant emphasis on cool room/greenhouse upgrades and irrigation system transitions, where water and energy efficiency were intertwined.

For pig and poultry farmers, the main difference to their dairy and horticulture peers was the focus on creating comfortable and energy efficient conditions for their animals through insulation, ventilation, cooling and heating.

In terms of future actions, there were two noticeable additions to the actions that had already been mentioned - batteries and biogas generators. However, both were seen as needing further development in terms of the technology and/or were currently cost prohibitive.

Energy influences

When asked what factors motivated the implementation of energy actions, we found a similar pattern or hierarchy of influences across the different sectors.

While cost savings specific to energy were typically first and foremost (many interviewees were able to recount in detail the savings they had achieved, highlighting the level of attention and scrutiny that energy matters receive), maintaining animal welfare/productivity, improving product quality, creating more efficient production processes, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions were frequently recounted as additional motives.

Interviewees’ capability to make these decisions was typically accelerated through grants or rebates (either through the AEIP or other third parties). These decisions often coincided with opportunistic events, such as when equipment needed to be replaced once it had reached its end-of-life, when new structures or properties were being developed, or as part of whole farm planning processes. Such opportunities highlight that timing is an important factor in energy decision-making.

While “other farmers” were the most commonly mentioned trusted information source on energy matters, additional sources of information included Agriculture Victoria, local trades, industry associations (e.g., DairyAustralia, National Farmers Federation), online resources, energy/equipment retailers, milk companies, and overseas enterprises (specifically for horticulture farmers).

Future support

Interviewees suggested a number of activities and directions that Agriculture Victoria could consider to support farmers with their future energy-related ambitions. These included providing objective updates on the latest technology and trends (including local case studies), refining futureAEIP audit and funding schemes, performing an energy brokerage role to help secure better energy deals, delivering training and having a greater in-person presence with farmers and their networks, and supporting farmer ambitions that involve more innovative approaches to managing energy.

‍

Recommendations

Reflecting on the results from the interviewees, we developed the following list of actionable and applied recommendations forAgriculture Victoria’s consideration:

• Highlight the multiple (and intertwined) benefits of managing energy use, costs and risks. Extend the focus beyond costs savings, but recognise that different benefits will resonate with different farmers depending on their context.
• Take advantage of when farmers are looking for energy-related information when purchasing or developing new properties and on-farm infrastructure. These potentially represent “teachable moments” where farmers are open to receiving advice and guidance. Explore other possible situations(e.g., replacing energy inefficient equipment before its end-of-life) where these “timing” considerations are also important.
• Explore opportunities to work with new or complementary sources of trusted information. This might include milk companies, trades people, supermarkets and overseas sources/counterparts (to Agriculture Victoria). Such relationships could assist in delivering coordinated, consistent, bespoke and up-to-date information to Victorian farmers.
• Develop and support a network of AEIP and/or specific energy action farmer “champions”across different sectors/locations. These farmers can provide independent, innovative, responsive, trusted and context-relevant experience and guidance to other farmers. Such a network can help facilitate ambition and innovation within the farming community, while also helping other farmers avoid making decisions based on misplaced assumptions or ill-informed information on energy-related topics.
• Identify ways to act on the future support directions suggested by farmers. While farmers indicated a range of potential future support needs – e.g., technology updates, case studies, an energy brokerage service, training, refining future grant and audit schemes – Agriculture Victoria should look to partner with other government departments, agencies and service providers to coordinate and deliver on some of these suggested needs in the best way possible.
• Focus on bridging the technology, knowledge and/or cost gap of future energy actions. Batteries and biogas generators are currently on the “wish list”of many farmers but remain out of reach for now. Closing these gaps could be explored through other funding schemes and collaborative project opportunities.

‍

Conclusion

The opinions and experiences of farmers from this study revealed that managing energy use, costs and risks is a critical part of farm decision-making. This was evident in the depth and breadth of actions that have been implemented, or are planned, and for reasons that are not confined to mandatory considerations around costs savings, but also because it is seen as good farm practice in terms of animal welfare/productivity, product quality, production efficiencies, and reducing greenhouse gases. However, these ambitions can be constrained (sometimes temporarily, while for others more indefinitely) by a combination of financial, technology and knowledge limitations. While the AEIP program has already helped to overcome some of these limitations, farmers can see further opportunities in the future to realise their ambitions, and see Agriculture Victoria playing a key role in delivering this support.

‍

Research Lead

Dr Jim Curtis