Economics of Utilizing Alternative Containers in Ornamental Crop Production Systems

Abstract

As high-input systems, plant production facilities for liner and container plants use large quantities of water, fertilizers, chemical pesticides, plastics, and labor. The use of renewable and biodegradable inputs for growing aesthetically pleasing and healthy plants could potentially improve the economic, environmental, and social sustainability of current production systems. However, costs for production components to integrate sustainable practices into established systems have not been fully explored to date. Our objectives were to determine the economic costs of commercial production systems using alternative containers in aboveground nursery systems. We determined the cost of production (COP) budgets for two woody plant species grown in several locations across the United States. Plants were grown in plastic pots and various alternative pots made from wood pulp (WP), fabric (FB), keratin (KT), and coconut fiber (coir). Cost of production inputs for aboveground nursery systems included the plant itself (liner), liner shipping costs, pot, pot shipping costs, substrate, substrate shipping costs, municipal water, and labor. Our results show that the main difference in the COP is the price of the pot. Although alternative containers could potentially increase water demands, water is currently an insignificant cost in relation to the entire production process. Use of alternative containers could reduce the carbon, water, and chemical footprints of nurseries and greenhouses; however, the cost of alternative containers must become more competitive with plastic to make them an acceptable routine choice for commercial growers.

Nitrogen Rate, Irrigation Frequency, and Container Type Affect Plant Growth and Nutrient Uptake of Encore Azalea ‘Chiffon’

“…When evaluating the feasibility of using biodegradable containers as sustainable alternative to traditional petroleum-based plastic containers, the major focus has been on aspects such as plant quality and water consumption characteristics (Koeser et al, 2013a;Wang et al, 2015), the longevity/ physical properties of the biocontainer (Beeks and Evans, 2013;Evans and Karcher, 2004;Koeser et al, 2013b;Li et al, 2015), and production cost (Brumfield et al, 2015). Biocontainers of various types were shown to produce plants of as high quality as plants grown in traditional plastic containers (Evans and Hensley, 2004;Evans and Karcher, 2004;Li et al, 2015).…”

“…As for the economical aspect of using biocontainers as sustainable alternative to plastic containers, the main difference in cost of production between a plastic-and a biocontainer production system was attributed to the price of the pot (Brumfield et al, 2015). Increased water use associated with biocontainers was considered to be an insignificant cost in relation to the entire production process (Brumfield et al, 2015). Although biocontainers tend to be more expensive than their plastic counterparts, the advantage of improved plant growth for certain species (Encore Ò azalea 'Chiffon' in this study) may help promote adoption of biocontainers.…”

Nitrogen Fertilization and Irrigation Frequency Affect Hydrangea Growth and Nutrient Uptake in Two Container Types

“…However, compared with plastic containers, some biocontainers require more frequent irrigations and increased amounts of irrigation water when they are made from porous hydrophilic materials, for instance paper, which has high evaporation loss through the container sidewall (Evans et al, 2010;Koeser et al, 2013;Wang et al, 2015). The increased water use in biodegradable containers, mostly considered to be an insignificant contribution to total production cost (Brumfield et al, 2015), has an unforeseen impact on water status and nutrient availability in the substrate and, therefore, plant growth and nutrient uptake.…”

Analysis of Economic and Social Costs of Growing Petunia ×hybrida in a Greenhouse Production System Using Alternative Containers

“…A grower who was involved with the Koeser et al (2014) study provided labor estimates (M. Flack, personal communication). We estimated labor costs using the methods described in Brumfield et al (2015). Although the Koeser et al (2014) study used overhead irrigation, hand watering is also a common practice and increases labor needs.…”