Nitrogen at $1 per Pound Forces Two Indiana Farmers to Rewrite Playbooks

Sidedress nitrogen at just under $1 per pound pushed Brian Scott's corn program $50 per acre over his spring budget — and the Delphi, Ind., farmer is now committing roughly $160,000 to on-farm storage so he never pays in-season prices again.

"Nitrogen ended up being probably our highest corn cost besides land this year," Scott said. "My sidedress nitrogen application was probably $50 per acre above our spring budget we put together ahead of planting. It was significant."

What does storage buy him?

Scott priced two 30,000-gallon tanks at a little under $1 per gallon of storage capacity, the figure that finally pushed a plan he had considered for several years into motion. Concrete, plumbing and labor add nearly $100,000, bringing the total investment to about $160,000.

The math is straightforward. If Scott had captured summer prices for his sidedress nitrogen this year, he would have saved $70,000 — meaning the tanks would have paid for themselves in the 2026 season alone.

"We're trying to turn the odds in our favor, hopefully," he said.

Scott has run this playbook before. Three years ago he installed a bulk propane tank, and the returns have beaten his own projections. "We've cut our drying costs for fuel in half by being able to buy in bulk," he said. "It's paying back faster than we penciled out."

Going forward, Scott plans to take the July nitrogen price once the tanks are operational. He concedes the strategy is imperfect — in-season price swings can still move against a summer purchase — but buying at the in-season price has cost him more. He is now collecting quotes to build the storage as economically as possible this winter and is waiting on first-quarter nitrogen bids before locking plans.

What did the other farmer do?

Ryan Facemire of Franklin, Ind., took a different route. In late March, facing steep nitrogen costs, he calculated he could not hit the increased breakeven yield of 190 bushels per acre on corn. He switched his entire 2026 cropping plan to soybeans.

The savings were immediate. "My inputs at that point were $350,000 less," Facemire said. "So kind of as an insurance, having to run that many acres of beans, I bought another combine."

The all-soybean decision paid off at harvest on several fronts:

• Fuel use dropped to about 1 gallon per acre for soybeans versus about 1.8 gallons per acre for corn.
• Facemire hauled roughly 100 fewer loads to the grain elevator than a corn crop would have required.
• Soybean prices kept climbing, and yields landed average to above average.

"I lucked out," he said. "Going to all soybeans was a good decision."

Will he repeat it in 2027?

Facemire has not decided on next year, but the economics are pulling him toward a repeat. With fall 2027 soybeans sitting around $12 and soybean insurance premiums cheaper than corn coverage, the current strategy remains attractive.

"Going to all soybeans next year isn't out of the picture," he said. "I never thought I'd say I'd run all soybeans again."

He also planted about 375 acres of wheat this year, contracted for $8 delivery next July. Double-cropping beans behind that wheat extends the margin. "You take $8 wheat and throw $12 double-crop beans behind it at 55 or 60 bushels per acre, and that's the best bang for your buck right there," he said. The wheat also adds soil cover and spreads his use of labor and land across the rotation.

Scott, meanwhile, keeps chasing maximum corn yields while trimming nitrogen rates. He trials a portion of his crop each year to find the input "sweet spot," and the off-season storage construction adds a pricing tool he has never had. With first-quarter nitrogen bids arriving and tank quotes in hand, both farmers enter 2027 with strategies rebuilt around a single input cost that reshaped their margins this year.