 |
|
|
U.S. Wants to Expand Use of Methyl Bromide |
|
By Katherine Stapp*
The initiative that the Bush administration will present in November would undermine efforts to curb this ozone-depleting gas, say environmentalists and scientists.
NEW YORK - Methyl bromide, a dangerous pesticide that the industrialized world must phase out by 2005, could get a new lease on life if the George W. Bush administration has its way at a United Nations meeting in November.
Methyl bromide is one of the gases known to deplete the Earth's atmospheric ozone layer, which screens out dangerous radiation, such as ultraviolet rays.
A worldwide ban on this gas, as well as other ozone-depleting compounds, like CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons), is mandated by the 1991 Montreal Protocol, a treaty ratified by 183 countries.
New research shows the phase-out is working.
In a study released last month, scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) found a 13-percent drop in methyl bromide concentrations in the lower atmosphere, a decline they attributed primarily to the Montreal Protocol.
Although the United States began a gradual reduction of methyl bromide a decade ago, it is still used to fumigate a wide range of crops and wood products. About 21,000 tons of the pesticide are consumed in this country each year -- 75 percent to prepare soil before planting, and the rest during processing, storage and export.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture is requesting methyl bromide fumigation for nearly all imported raw-wood packaging, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) wants to allow U.S. farmers to continue using millions of pounds of the pesticide on crops.
The United States plans to ask for "critical use" exemptions at the U.N. Ozone Secretariat meeting in Nairobi in November, on the theory that there is no technically or economically viable substitute.
"One must consider the crop in question, the pests that must be managed, the geographic location, etc.," Nancy Ragsdale, a scientist with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, told Tierramérica.
"Looking at the whole picture, currently there isn't a readily available approach that can replace methyl bromide without major adjustments in pest management and potential economic losses."
"The consensus is that exemptions will not have a significant effect on the ozone layer," she added.
Farm labor groups have long sought a ban on methyl bromide, citing its harmful effects on workers' health.
In high concentrations, methyl bromide is known to cause central nervous system and respiratory failure, convulsions, coma and even death. Exposure of pregnant women can result in birth defects.
The U.S. National Cancer Institute has linked methyl bromide to increased rates of prostate cancer among farm workers and other pesticide handlers.
The state of California is introducing a new rule next year that will require protective gear (mainly respirators) for workers who regularly handle methyl bromide.
But industry associations insist that the pesticide is essential.
"Production agriculture has reduced the use of methyl bromide to the bare minimum, but we have come to our breaking point on further compliance with the phase-out," Bill Pauli, the president of the California Farm Bureau Federation, told a U.S. Congressional committee in June.
If Washington gets the exemptions sought, it would permit the manufacture of 10,000 metric tons of the pesticide, increasing methyl bromide use by 39 percent above 1991 levels for a range of crops, including strawberries, tomatoes and sweet potatoes.
Environmental and public health watchdogs disagree that the effect of such a reversal would be as harmless as claimed.
"In terms of impact on the ozone layer, methyl bromide is, molecule for molecule, a more potent ozone depleter than CFCs. Its phase-out would absolutely make a difference," Kristin Schafer of the Pesticide Action Network told Tierramérica.
"Years of scientific work and policy negotiations went into establishing the 2005 phase-out date. It's based on sound science and is the agreed commitment of the international community," she added.
"It's shameful that a handful of U.S. agricultural interests vested in the continued use of this dangerous chemical are undermining this important international agreement."
Back in 1995, the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee, an international panel of experts working under the Montreal Protocol process, determined that there were viable alternatives for more than 95 percent of methyl bromide uses worldwide, Schafer said.
Two possible substitutes, iodomethane and SEP-100, a liquid formula of sodium azide, are currently awaiting approval by the EPA.
Even if atmospheric levels of both bromine and chlorine continue to drop, full recovery of the ozone layer is still expected to take several decades.
"Decreases in ozone-depleting substances are a direct result of international limits on production," said Stephen Montzka, a NOAA scientist.
"Without continued worldwide adherence to the restrictions outlined in the Protocol, these trends could slow and delay the recovery of stratospheric ozone," he said.
* Katherine Stapp is a Tierramérica contributor.
|
