DOCSLIB.ORG

Release of PCDD/Fs from Pesticide Use ‐ Case Study Australia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Release of PCDD/Fs from Pesticide Use ‐ Case Study Australia Release of PCDD/Fs from Pesticide Use ‐ Case Study Australia Eva Holt1, Roland Weber2, Gavin Stevenson3, Caroline Gaus1 1The University of Queensland (National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology (EnTox)), Australia 2POPs Environmental Consulting, 73035 Göppingen, Germany 3Dioxin Analysis Unit, National Measurement Institute, Pymble, Australia National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology: a joint venture of The University of Queensland and Queensland Health 3000 6370 2737 4901 Best 2500 Max 2300 2501 2000 2260 1500 1000 873 661 1099 500 290 323 23 29150 181 170 198 486 33 560 0 19 98 96 103 51 88 A 14 B 9 42 D F CH AUS DK 22 CAN FIN N S HGK JPN NL HRO NZ HUN SR UK UNEP inventory summary 1998 USA MWI IWI 8000 Small Combusters Crematories Electric Arc Sinter Zink Aluminum 6000 Other Sources Cigaretts Traffic 4000 2000 0 Dioxinemission Air (g TEQ/a) 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003* g TEQ/Jahr 70000 PCDD/PCDF in PCP 60000 PCDD/PCDF in CNP co-PCB 50000 Other Chlororganics Industrial Waste Incineration 40000 Municipal Waste Incineration 30000 PCP 20000 CNP IWIIWI MWIMWI 10000 co-PCB 0 1958 1963 1968 1973 1978 1983 1988 1993 Masunaga et al. 1998 In the past ¾ Bans or regulations e.g. 2,4,5-T and PCP ¾ Improved production technology Today ¾ Many pesticides still have the potential to contain dioxin impurities (US EPA list with approximately 60 suspected pesticides) ¾ Pesticides can contain dioxin precursors (and form dioxins in the environment by UV exposure or open burning) ¾ Very limited data: cannot evaluate to which extent use of pesticides contribute to dioxin emission and contamination Australian study purpose: ¾Determine whether other pesticides contain dioxin impurities (in this case current used pesticides in Australia) ¾Preliminary investigation of dioxin formation from pesticide derived precursor ¾Estimate dioxin emissions from ?? pesticide use National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology: a joint venture of The University of Queensland and Queensland Health Phenoxy herbicides: 2,4-D Mecoprop MCPA 2,4-DB 2,4,5-T (obsolete) Other herbicides: Triclopyr Fluroxypyr Chlorthal dimethyl Imazamox Flumetsulam Herbicides - Secondary active constituents: Picloram Dicamba Diflufenican Fungicides: Chlorothalonil Quintozene Prochloraz Insecticides: Fenamiphos Chlorpyrifos Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Cl Lindane Chlordane Heptachlor (obsolete) (obsolete) (obsolete) 10,000 5,700 TEQ concentrations in current-use pesticides 3,900 2,400 Active Ingredient basis Formulation basis 1,000 (Middle bound) 180 180 100 100 63 56 27 13 13 12 9.4 10 8.6 6.0 5.5 5.4 4.8 4.9 4.2 1.7 TEQ (WHO 05) concentrations (pg/g) concentrations 05) (WHO TEQ 1 0 All investigated pesticides contained PCDD/PCDF !! National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology: a joint venture of The University of Queensland and Queensland Health Investigated current-use pesticides – no UNEP EF UNEP Emission factors 10,000,000 2,000,000 Range EU,USA Average (or n=1) 1,000,000 Other data (Masunaga et al. 2001) 800,000 China 300,000 100,000 old technol. 10,000 5.700 7,000 4,800 1,000 2,400 700 500 700 1,000 Na-PCP 180 180 400 100 100 63 new technol. 56 94 27 31 TEQ concentrations (pg/g AI) (pg/g concentrations TEQ 9.4 13 10 5.5 5.4 4.9 4.2 8.6 4.8 1.7 1 0 Most current use pesticides have no PCDD/F emission factor National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology: a joint venture of The University of Queensland and Queensland Health Usage of 2,4-D; 2,4-DB; PCNB: • Label application rates & frequencies, • % crop area treated▲ • and cropping area + +[ABS 2008; Australian Government 2004; USEPA 2005 & 2006]; ▲ USEPA 2001 & 2003 TEQ emission estimates to Australian land Re‐evaluation, NationalDioxin Program, Bawden et al. 2004 This study, Holt et al. 2009 * Meyers et al. 2008 1000 ** 1,020 228 - incl. non-agricultural use 114 (~25-60% of total use) 100 110 51 49 28 82 - agricultural use only 33 22 16 13 11 10 17 13 3.8 6.0 1.8 4.3 3.6 1 1.3 1.0 0.4 0.42 0.25 0.15 0.1 0.13 0.033 0.020 0.010 0.0090 0.01 Estimated emission (g TEQ TEQ annum-1) (g emission Estimated 0.0100.012 0.0026 Low-high emission estimate 0.001 0.0019 Best emission estimate 0.0011 0.0014 0.0001 **Not yet in official inventory *Emissions for pesticides were calculated based on pesticide minimum and maximum label application rates, land area and application frequency using middle bound TEQ concentrations. No volume of use could be estimated for other pesticides National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology: a joint venture of The University of Queensland and Queensland Health ¾ PCNB formulation increased TEQ 3 to 4 times when exposed to sunlight for some days ¾ Potential for significant dioxin formation after application (how to address in emission inventory?) National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology: a joint venture of The University of Queensland and Queensland Health ¾All investigated pesticides contained PCDD/F ¾Pentachloronitrobenzene (PCNB, Quintozene) contained high levels of PCDD/F (suggested EF 4.8 mg TEQ/t; average of three different formulations) and close to EF of 2,4,5-T. ¾The emission from PCNB could be the single highest PCDD/F source in Australia (up to 82 - 228 g TEQ/a). Preliminary results suggest that post application formation (UV light) might result in 3 to 4 times higher release. ¾ + contribution of all other pesticides. National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology: a joint venture of The University of Queensland and Queensland Health ¾The precursor quality of pesticides and post application formation need to be considered for total environmental pollution ¾ How to consider this in the toolkit? ¾Pesticides need to be screened for their PCDD/PCDF/UPOPs content to establish emission factors ¾Contribution of pesticides need to be considered in PCDD/F inventories. National Research Centre for Environmental Toxicology: a joint venture of The University of Queensland and Queensland Health Bromophos; Dimethylamine 2,3,5- triiodobenzoate; Neburon; Crufomate; MCPB, 4- butyric acid [4-( 2- Methyl- 4- chlorophenoxy) Dichlorodifluoromethane; Bromophos; Dimethylamine 2,3,5- triiodobenzoate; Neburon; Crufomate; MCPB, 4- butyric acid [4-( 2- Methyl- 4- chlorophenoxy) butyric acid]; MCPB, Na salt [Sodium 4-( 2- methyl- 4- chlorophenoxy) butyrate]; 4- Chlorophenoxyacetic acid; Chloroxuron; Dichlobenil; Propanil; Dichlofenthion; DDT; Dichlone; Ammonium chloramben; Disul, DCNA, Potassium 2-( 2- methyl-4-chlorophenoxy) propionate; MCPP, DEA Salt; MCPP, IOE; Dicapthon; Monuron trichloroacetate; Diuron; Linuron; Metobromuron; Methyl parathionl; Dichlorophene; Dichlorophene, sodium salt; 1,2,4,5- Tetrachloro- 3- nitrobenzene; Ethyl parathionl; Carbophenothion; Ronnell; Mitin FF; Orthodichlorobenzene; Paradichlorobenzene; Chlorophene; Potassium 2- benzyl- 4- chlorophenate; Sodium 2- benzyl- 4- chlorophenate; Chlorophenol; 2- Chloro- 4- phenylphenol; Potassium 2- chloro- 4- phenylphenate; 4- Chloro- 2- phenylphenol; 4- Chloro- 2- phenylphenol, potassium salt; 6- Chloro- 2- phenylphenol; 6- Chloro- 2- phenylphenol, potassium salt; 4- Chloro- 2- phenylphenol, sodium salt; 6- Chloro- 2- phenylphenol, sodium salt; 4 and 6- Chloro- 2- phenylphenol, diethanolamine salt; 2- Chloro- 4- phenylphenol, sodium salt; 4- Chloro- 2- cyclopentylphenol; Fentichlor; 4- Chloro- 2- cyclopentylphenol, potassium salt; 4- Chloro- 2- cyclopentylphenol, sodium salt; Chlorophacinone; ADBAC; Niclosamide; 5- Chlorosalicylanilide; 2- Methyl- 4- isothiazolin- 3- one; Tetradifon; 6- Chlorothymol; Anilazine; Chlorothalonil; Fenac; Chlorfenvinphos; O-( 2- Chloro- 1-( 2,5- dichlorophenyl) vinyl) O, O- diethyl phosphorothioate; PCMX; Piperalin; Fenamiphos; p- Chlorophenyl diiodomethyl sulfone; Metribuzin; Bifenox; Methazole; Diflubenzuron; Oxadiazon; Fenvaler Bromothalin ate; Fluvalinate; Iprodione; Triadimefon; Diclofop – methyl; Profenofos; Oxyfluorfen; Imazalil; Vinclozolin; Fenridazon; Tridiphane; Paclobutrazol; Linalool; [a-( 2- chlorophenyl)- a-( 4- chlorophenyl)- 5- pyrimidinemethanol]; Dicamba dimethylamine; Diethanolamine dicamba; 2,4-D; Lithium 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetate; Potassium 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Sodium 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Ammonium 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Alkanol* amine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate *( salts of the ethanol and ispropanol series); Alkyl* amine 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetate *( 100% C12); Alkyl* amine 2,4 dichlorophenoxyacetate *( 100% C14); Alkyl* amine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate *(as in fatty acids of tall oil); Diethanolamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Diethylamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Dimethylamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; N, N- Dimethyloleylamine2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Ethanolamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Heptylamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Isopropanolamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Isopropylamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Morpholine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; N- Oleyl- 1,3- propylenediamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Octylamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Triethanolamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Triethylamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Triisopropanolamine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; N, N- Dimethyl oleyl- linoleyl amine 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Butoxyethoxypropyl 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Butoxyethyl 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Butoxypropyl 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Butyl 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Isobutyl 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Isooctyl( 2- ethylhexyl) 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Isooctyl( 2- ethyl- 4- methylpentyl) 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate; Isooctyl( 2- octyl) 2,4- dichlorophenoxyacetate;
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic Acid
    2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid IUPAC (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid name 2,4-D Other hedonal names trinoxol Identifiers CAS [94-75-7] number SMILES OC(COC1=CC=C(Cl)C=C1Cl)=O ChemSpider 1441 ID Properties Molecular C H Cl O formula 8 6 2 3 Molar mass 221.04 g mol−1 Appearance white to yellow powder Melting point 140.5 °C (413.5 K) Boiling 160 °C (0.4 mm Hg) point Solubility in 900 mg/L (25 °C) water Related compounds Related 2,4,5-T, Dichlorprop compounds Except where noted otherwise, data are given for materials in their standard state (at 25 °C, 100 kPa) 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) is a common systemic herbicide used in the control of broadleaf weeds. It is the most widely used herbicide in the world, and the third most commonly used in North America.[1] 2,4-D is also an important synthetic auxin, often used in laboratories for plant research and as a supplement in plant cell culture media such as MS medium. History 2,4-D was developed during World War II by a British team at Rothamsted Experimental Station, under the leadership of Judah Hirsch Quastel, aiming to increase crop yields for a nation at war.[citation needed] When it was commercially released in 1946, it became the first successful selective herbicide and allowed for greatly enhanced weed control in wheat, maize (corn), rice, and similar cereal grass crop, because it only kills dicots, leaving behind monocots. Mechanism of herbicide action 2,4-D is a synthetic auxin, which is a class of plant growth regulators.
    [Show full text]
  • Common and Chemical Names of Herbicides Approved by the WSSA
    Weed Science 2010 58:511–518 Common and Chemical Names of Herbicides Approved by the Weed Science Society of America Below is the complete list of all common and chemical of herbicides as approved by the International Organization names of herbicides approved by the Weed Science Society of for Standardization (ISO). A sponsor may submit a proposal America (WSSA) and updated as of September 1, 2010. for a common name directly to the WSSA Terminology Beginning in 1996, it has been published yearly in the last Committee. issue of Weed Science with Directions for Contributors to A herbicide common name is not synonymous with Weed Science. This list is published in lieu of the selections a commercial formulation of the same herbicide, and in printed previously on the back cover of Weed Science. Only many instances, is not synonymous with the active ingredient common and chemical names included in this complete of a commercial formulation as identified on the product list should be used in WSSA publications. In the absence of label. If the herbicide is a salt or simple ester of a parent a WSSA-approved common name, the industry code number compound, the WSSA common name applies to the parent as compiled by the Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) with compound only. CAS systematic chemical name or the systematic chemical The chemical name used in this list is that preferred by the name alone may be used. The current approved list is also Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) according to their system of available at our web site (www.wssa.net).
    [Show full text]
  • Special Report 354 April 1972 Agricultural Experiment Station
    ORTMAL DO ;10T REMOVE 7.9 m FILE Special Report 354 April 1972 Agricultural Experiment Station Oregon State University, Corvallis I FIELD APPLICATION OF HERBICIDES--AVOIDING DANGER TO FISH Erland T. Juntunen Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon and Logan A. Norris Pacific Northwest Forestry Sciences Laboratory and Range Experiment Station Forest Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture Corvallis, Oregon April, 1972 Trade names are used in this publication solely to provide specific information. No endorsement of products is intended nor is criticism implieLl to products mentioned or omitted. Recommendations are not made concerning safe use of products nor is any guarantee or warranty of results or effects of the products intended or implied. ii Chemical weed and brush control with herbicides is an important land management practice in modern agriculture and forestry. In some cases, herbicides are applied directly to bodies of water for aquatic weed control. More commonly, herbicides are applied to lands adjacent to waterways for general weed and brush control. The responsible applicator will avoid damage to fishery resources by being fully aware of a particular herbicides potential hazard to fish. Herbicide applications should be considered hazardous to fish when there is the probability fish will be exposed to herbicide concen- trations which are harmful. This bulletin offers information that will aid in selecting the particular herbicides and formulations of least hazard to fish considering the toxicity of the herbicide and the poten- tial for its entry into streams, lakes, or ponds. Entry of Herbicides into the Aquatic Environment In aquatic weed control, the effective concentration of herbicide in the water depends on the rate of application, the rate of the spread of the chemical, the size and chemical composition of the body of water, the rate of degradation or adsorption of the chemical on sediments, and the rate of mixing of treated water with untreated water.
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Residue Method I for Agricultural Chemicals by LC-MS (Agricultural Products)
    Multi-residue Method I for Agricultural Chemicals by LC-MS (Agricultural Products) 1. Analytes See Table 2 or 3. 2. Instruments Liquid chromatograph-mass spectrometer (LC-MS) Liquid chromatograph-tandem mass spectrometer (LC-MS/MS) 3. Reagents Use the reagents listed in Section 3 of the General Rules except for the following. 0.5 mol/L Phosphate buffer (pH 7.0): Weigh 52.7 g of dipotassium hydrogenphosphate (K2HPO4) and 30.2 g of potassium dihydrogenphosphate (KH2PO4), dissolve in about 500 mL of water, adjust the pH to 7.0 with 1 mol/L sodium hydroxide or 1 mol/L hydrochloric acid, and add water to make a 1 L solution. Reference standards of agricultural chemicals: Reference standards of known purities for each agricultural chemical. 4. Procedure 1) Extraction i) Grains, beans, nuts and seeds Add 20 mL of water to 10.0 g of sample and let stand for 15 minutes. Add 50 mL of acetonitrile, homogenize, and filter with suction. Add 20 mL of acetonitrile to the residue on the filter paper, homogenize, and filter with suction. Combine the resulting filtrates, and add acetonitrile to make exactly 100 mL. Take a 20 mL aliquot of the extract, add 10 g of sodium chloride and 20 mL of 0.5 mol/L phosphate buffer (pH 7.0), and shake for 10 minutes. Let stand, and discard the separated aqueous layer. Add 10 mL of acetonitrile to an octadecylsilanized silica gel cartridge (1,000 mg) and discard the effluent. Transfer the acetonitrile layer to the cartridge, elute with 2 mL of acetonitrile, collect the total eluates, dehydrate with anhydrous sodium sulfate, and filter out the anhydrous sodium sulfate.
    [Show full text]
  • Diurnal Leaf Movement Effects on Spray Interception and Glyphosate Efficacy Author(S): Jason K
    Diurnal Leaf Movement Effects on Spray Interception and Glyphosate Efficacy Author(s): Jason K. Norsworthy, Lawrence R. Oliver and Larry C. Purcell Source: Weed Technology, Vol. 13, No. 3 (Jul. - Sep., 1999), pp. 466-470 Published by: Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Weed Science Society of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3989032 Accessed: 09-02-2018 21:24 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Cambridge University Press, Weed Science Society of America are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Weed Technology This content downloaded from 160.36.239.64 on Fri, 09 Feb 2018 21:24:07 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Weed Technology. 1999. Volume 13:466-470 Diurnal Leaf Movement Effects on Spray Interception and Glyphosate Efficacy' JASON K. NORSWORTHY, LAWRENCE R. OLIVER, and LARRY C. PURCELL2 Abstract: Time of day at which a herbicide is applied can affect efficacy, and variability may be attributed to leaf angles at application. Spray interception by hemp sesbania (Sesbania exaltata), sicklepod (Senna obtusifolia), and prickly sida (Sida spinosa) under day and night conditions was quantified by measuring interception of a 2-M potassium nitrate solution.
    [Show full text]
  • (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 7,943,644 B2 Uhr Et Al
    USOO794364.4B2 (12) United States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 7,943,644 B2 Uhr et al. (45) Date of Patent: May 17, 2011 (54) STABILIZATION OF IODINE-CONTAINING (56) References Cited BOCDES BY MEANS OF SPECIAL AZOLE COMPOUNDS U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS 2,739,922 A * 3/1956 Shelanski ..................... 524,548 (75) Inventors: Hermann Uhr, Leverkusen (DE); 4,276,211 A 6/1981 Singer et al. ... 260/29.6 MN Johannes Kaulen, Odenthal (DE); 4.297.258 A 10/1981 Long, Jr. .............. 260f29.6 MN Thomas Jaetsch, Köln (DE); Peter 4,552,885. A 1 1/1985 Gabriele et al. .............. 514/316 Spetmann, Leverkusen (DE) 5,051,256 A * 9/1991 Barnes ........... ... 424/402 6,143,204. A 1 1/2000 Lutz et al. ...... ... 252/384 rsr rr 6.353,021 B1 3/2002 Gaglani et al. ... 514,478 (73) Assignee: NNESS putschland GmbH, 6,472,424 B1 10/2002 Gaglani et al. ... 514,478 everkusen (DE) 6,946,427 B2* 9/2005 Lutz et al. ...... ... 504,140 c - 2006/00 13833 A1 1/2006 Bartko ........... ... 424/400 (*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this 2007/0128246 A1* 6/2007 Hossainy et al. ............. 424/423 patent is extended or adjusted under 35 U.S.C. 154(b) by 18 days. FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS WO 98.22543 5, 1998 (21) Appl. No.: 12/281,163 WO 99.291.76 6, 1999 WO OOf 16628 3, 2000 (22) PCT Filed: Feb. 21, 2007 WO 2007 O28527 3, 2007 (86). PCT No.: PCT/EP2007/001480 OTHER PUBLICATIONS S371 (c)(1), Nomiya, Kenji, et al.
    [Show full text]
  • AP-42, CH 9.2.2: Pesticide Application
    9.2.2PesticideApplication 9.2.2.1General1-2 Pesticidesaresubstancesormixturesusedtocontrolplantandanimallifeforthepurposesof increasingandimprovingagriculturalproduction,protectingpublichealthfrompest-bornediseaseand discomfort,reducingpropertydamagecausedbypests,andimprovingtheaestheticqualityofoutdoor orindoorsurroundings.Pesticidesareusedwidelyinagriculture,byhomeowners,byindustry,andby governmentagencies.Thelargestusageofchemicalswithpesticidalactivity,byweightof"active ingredient"(AI),isinagriculture.Agriculturalpesticidesareusedforcost-effectivecontrolofweeds, insects,mites,fungi,nematodes,andotherthreatstotheyield,quality,orsafetyoffood.Theannual U.S.usageofpesticideAIs(i.e.,insecticides,herbicides,andfungicides)isover800millionpounds. AiremissionsfrompesticideusearisebecauseofthevolatilenatureofmanyAIs,solvents, andotheradditivesusedinformulations,andofthedustynatureofsomeformulations.Mostmodern pesticidesareorganiccompounds.EmissionscanresultdirectlyduringapplicationorastheAIor solventvolatilizesovertimefromsoilandvegetation.Thisdiscussionwillfocusonemissionfactors forvolatilization.Thereareinsufficientdataavailableonparticulateemissionstopermitemission factordevelopment. 9.2.2.2ProcessDescription3-6 ApplicationMethods- Pesticideapplicationmethodsvaryaccordingtothetargetpestandtothecroporothervalue tobeprotected.Insomecases,thepesticideisapplieddirectlytothepest,andinotherstothehost plant.Instillothers,itisusedonthesoilorinanenclosedairspace.Pesticidemanufacturershave developedvariousformulationsofAIstomeetboththepestcontrolneedsandthepreferred
    [Show full text]
  • Literature Review of Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation With
    Eurasian watermilfoil in Christmas Lake, 2011 Literature Review on Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation with Aquatic Herbicides Compared to Other Control Methods: Effectiveness, Impacts, and Costs Prepared for: Prepared by: Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Steve McComas Blue Water Science St. Paul, MN 55116 September 2011 1 Literature Review on Controlling Aquatic Invasive Vegetation with Aquatic Herbicides Compared to Other Control Methods: Effectiveness, Impacts, and Costs Steve McComas, Blue Water Science Table of Contents page number Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Use of Herbicides as an Aquatic Plant Control Technique ...................................................................................... 2 How Herbicides Work and Their Mode of Action ....................................................................................................... 3 Aquatic Herbicide Impacts on Humans and the Ecosystem ....................................................................................... 8 Where to Find Sources of Specific Information on herbicide Products and Their Active Ingredients ....................... 16 Harvesting, Drawdown, and Biocontrol as Aquatic Plant Control Techniques ................................................... 17 Summary of Control Techniques for Non-Native Curlyleaf Pondweed and Eurasian Watermilfoil ................... 25 Control Techniques for Other
    [Show full text]
  • Suggested Guide for Weed Control 1969
    SUGGESTED GUIDE FOR WEED CONTROL 1969 Ü.S.CE?T. Of AGRICULTURE NATIONIUGWCUITURAL lllRARy MAY 12 196y CURRENT SERIAL RECORDS Agriculture Handbook No. 332 Agricultural Research Service UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE USDA POLICY ON PESTICIDES One of the most important responsibilities of control which provide the least potential hazard the Department of Agriculture is to develop and to man and animals. When residual pesticides facilitate the use of methods and materials for the must be used to control or eliminate pests, they control of pests. The Department's research, shall be used in minimal effective amounts, applied education, and regulatory programs are expected precisely to the infested area and at minimal to make continuing progress in the never-ending effective frequency. Biological, ecological, or cul- struggle to protect man, his food and fiber sup- plies, and his forests from the ravages of pests. tural methods or nonpersistent and low-toxicity Such protection is essential if the American people pesticides will be used whenever such means are are to continue to enjoy their present high standard feasible and will safely and effectively control or of living, and if this abundance of quality food and eliminate target pests. relative freedom from the hazards of pests are to be In carrying out these objectives, the Department enjoyed by all mankind. will cooperate in the fullest with the other agencies In protecting man, animals, plants, farm and and departments of government, and will seek to forest products, communities, and households develop broad areas of collaboration in establishing against depredation of pests, the Department has the criteria to guide the use and development of vital concern for (1) the health and well-being of pest-control materials.
    [Show full text]
  • Classification of Herbicides
    Title of the course : Weed Management Credit: 3(2+1) Class : 3rd Year IInd Semester Title of the topic : Principles of weed management College : Krishi vigyan Kendra,College of Agriculture, Rewa, JNKVV, Jabalpur Name of Teacher : Dr. (Mrs.) Smita Singh Classification of Herbicides Herbicides: Chemical method of weed control is very effective in certain cases and have great scope provided the herbicides are cheap, efficient and easily available. The chemicals used for killing the weeds or inhibiting growth of weeds are called herbicides (Weedicides). Classification of Herbicides: Herbicides are classified in different ways: A) First Group Chemical Herbicides: I) Classification of herbicides according to chemical composition. II) Classification of herbicides according to their use. III) Classification of herbicides based on time of application. IV) Classification of herbicides according to Formulation. V) Classification of herbicides according to residual effect. B) Second Group – Bio herbicides C) Third Group herbicidal mixtures. Classification of herbicide I) Classification of Herbicide Based on Chemical Nature or Composition Compounds having chemical affinities are grouped together. This is useful in liting and characterising herbicides. i) Inorganic Herbicides:Contain no carbon actions in their molecules. These were the first chemicals used for weed control before the introduction of the organic compounds, example are: a) Acids:Arsenic acid, arsenious acid, arsenic trioxide sulphuric acid. b) Salts:Borax, copper sulphate, ammonium sulphate, Na chlorate , Na arsenite , copper nitrate. ii) Organic Herbicides:Oils and non oils contain carbon and hydrogen in their molecules. a) Oils: Diesel oil, standard solvent, xylene-type, aromatic oils, polycyclic , aromatic oils etc. b) Aliphatics:Dalapon, TCA, Acrolein, Glyphosphate methyl bromide.
    [Show full text]
  • AP-42, Vol. 1, Final Background Document for Pesticide Application
    Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 9.2.2 Pesticide Application Final Report For U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Emission Inventory Branch EPA Contract No. 68-D2-0159 Work Assignment No. I-08 MRI Project No. 4601-08 September 1994 Emission Factor Documentation for AP-42 Section 9.2.2 Pesticide Application Final Report For U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Emission Inventory Branch Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Attn: Mr. Dallas Safriet (MD-14) Emission Factor and Methodology EPA Contract No. 68-D2-0159 Work Assignment No. I-08 MRI Project No. 4601-08 September 1994 NOTICE The information in this document has been funded wholly or in part by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Contract No. 68-D2-0159 to Midwest Research Institute. It has been subjected to the Agency's peer and administrative review, and it has been approved for publication as an EPA document. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. iii iv PREFACE This report was prepared by Midwest Research Institute (MRI) for the Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), under Contract No. 68-D2-0159, Assignment No. 005 and I-08. Mr. Dallas Safriet was the EPA work assignment manager for this project. Approved for: MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE Roy M. Neulicht Program Manager Environmental Engineering Department Jeff Shular Director, Environmental Engineering Department September 29, 1994 v vi CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ................................................ viii LIST OF TABLES ................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Minnesota Chemicals of High Concern List
    Minnesota Department of Health, Chemicals of High Concern List, 2019 Persistent, Bioaccumulative, Toxic (PBT) or very Persistent, very High Production CAS Bioaccumulative Use Example(s) and/or Volume (HPV) Number Chemical Name Health Endpoint(s) (vPvB) Source(s) Chemical Class Chemical1 Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; IRIS; NTP Wood and textiles finishes, Cancer, Respiratory 11th ROC); WA Appen1; WA CHCC; disinfection, tissue 50-00-0 Formaldehyde x system, Eye irritant Minnesota HRV; Minnesota RAA preservative Gastrointestinal Minnesota HRL Contaminant 50-00-0 Formaldehyde (in water) system EU Category 1 Endocrine disruptor pesticide 50-29-3 DDT, technical, p,p'DDT Endocrine system Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; IRIS; NTP PAH (chem-class) 11th ROC; OSPAR Chemicals of Concern; EuC Endocrine Disruptor Cancer, Endocrine Priority List; EPA Final PBT Rule for 50-32-8 Benzo(a)pyrene x x system TRI; EPA Priority PBT); Oregon P3 List; WA Appen1; Minnesota HRV WA Appen1; Minnesota HRL Dyes and diaminophenol mfg, wood preservation, 51-28-5 2,4-Dinitrophenol Eyes pesticide, pharmaceutical Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; NTP 11th Preparation of amino resins, 51-79-6 Urethane (Ethyl carbamate) Cancer, Development ROC); WA Appen1 solubilizer, chemical intermediate Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; IRIS; NTP Research; PAH (chem-class) 11th ROC; EPA Final PBT Rule for 53-70-3 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Cancer x TRI; WA PBT List; OSPAR Chemicals of Concern); WA Appen1; Oregon P3 List Maine (CA Prop 65; NTP 11th ROC); Research 53-96-3 2-Acetylaminofluorene Cancer WA Appen1 Maine (CA Prop 65; IARC; IRIS; NTP Lubricant, antioxidant, 55-18-5 N-Nitrosodiethylamine Cancer 11th ROC); WA Appen1 plastics stabilizer Maine (CA Prop 65; IRIS; NTP 11th Pesticide (EPA reg.
    [Show full text]