Global Report on Validated Alternatives to the Use of Methyl Bromide for Soil Fumigation Cover photo Alternative to methyl bromide: Float System (description on pages 17 - 24) Global Report on Validated Alternatives to the Use of Methyl Bromide for Soil Fumigation Edited by R. Labrada and L. Fornasari The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization and the Environment Programme of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning delimitation of its frontiers, or boundaries. Moreover, the views expressed do not necessarily represent the decision of the stated policy of the Food and Agriculture Organization and the Environment This publication may be reproduced in whole, or in part and in any form for educational, or non-profit, purposes without special permission from the copyright holder, provided that acknowledgment of the source is made. FAO and UNEP would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale, or for any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from FAO, or UNEP. ã FAO and UNEP 2001 Contacts: Dr. Ricardo Labrada, Weed Officer Food and Agriculturen Organization of the United Nations - Plant Protection Service Via delle Terme di Caracalla 00100 Rome, ITALY Tel. +39-0657054079 Fax. +39-0657056347 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGP/AGPP/IPM/Weeds/Default.htm Website: http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGP/AGPP/IPM/Web_Brom/Default.htm Mr. Rajendra Shende, Chief Energy and OzonAction Unit Division of Technology, Industry and Economics United Nations Environment Programme Tour Mirabeau 39-43 quai André Citroen 75739 Paris Cedex 15, FRANCE Tel. +33 1 44 37 1450 Fax. +33 1 44 37 1474 E-mail: [email protected] Website: http://www.uneptie.org/ozonaction.html This document is available on the FAO website at: http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/FAOINFO/AGRICULT/AGP/agpp/IPM/Web_Brom/Default/htm and on the UNEP OzonAction website at: http://www.uneptie.org/ozonaction.html 2 CONTENTS Page Contents iii PREFACE v List of Contributors vii List of Acronyms viii COUNTRY REPORTS Chapter I - LATIN AMERICA 1 Alternatives for the replacement of Methyl Bromide in Argentina L. A. Salles, D. A. Sosa & A. Valeiro 3 Effective alternatives to Methyl Bromide in Brazil 13 L. A. Salles Chapter II - NORTH AMERICA 25 Field validation of Methyl Bromide alternatives in Florida fresh market vegetable production systems D. O. Chellemi 27 Chapter III – EUROPE 31 Alternatives to Methyl Bromide for soil fumigation in Spain A. Bello, J.A. López-Pérez, L. Díaz-Viruliche and J. Tello 33 Available alternatives for Italy M. L. Gullino 47 Chapter IV – ASIA 61 Approaches for the reduction of the use of Methyl Bromide and alternatives in Japan A. Tateya 63 CHAPTER V – AFRICA 71 Validated alternatives used in Kenya and Morocco M. Ammati and B. Nyambo 73 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 87 iii iv PREFACE Methyl bromide (MeBr) is a fumigant used to control arthropods, nematodes, pathogens and weed seeds in soil in several crops, such as tomatoes, peppers, eggplants, tobacco, strawberries, ornamentals and other crops. Some years ago it was discovered that this fumigant is a strong chemical depleting the Earth's ozone layer. Its ozone depletion potential is 0.4, i.e. higher than the admissible threshold of 0.2. In addition, it is also known that bromine released by MeBr is 40 times more aggressive than chlorine in breaking down ozone on a per atom basis. Governments and international agencies aware of the problem have agreed to establish a programme for phasing out the use of MeBr. Since the fumigant is used in several high-income crops the established phase out gives times to the countries for the development of new alternatives to replace MeBr. During the last five-seven years some projects and activities have been carried out in several countries which had a high consumption of MeBr as a soil fumigant. The work has been applied field research for the development of new alternatives and demonstrations of those highly effective ones in large plots. As a result of the above work there are available some published materials on new MeBr alternatives, which describe the feasibility and the disadvantage of each new pest control measure. Some of these publications have come out from several workshops and symposia organized in different countries by UNEP, UNIDO and other organizations. The main purpose of the present report is to provide information of successfully used alternatives in some countries or regions, where MeBr phase out is going on. Although the report often shows the lack of already validated alternatives, particularly for a region like Africa, the material provides enough elements of the technical and economical success of the use of several alternatives as well as those, which are nearly to be introduced into the agricultural practice. Agricultural researchers and extensionists could use this information for further studies and / or validation. This material, along with the Manual in preparation by FAO (sponsored by UNEP) (1), can also be a good reference for the training on new (1) R. Braga, R. Labrada, L. Fornasari and N. Fratini. Manual for Training of Extension Workers and Farmers on Alternatives to Methyl Bromide for Soil Fumigation. FAO Plant Production and Protection Paper N. (...) In Prep. v alternatives in different countries, particularly for Training of Trainers (TOTs). In addition, FAO / UNEP do hope that such a report and training activities, wich are part of the Farmer Education and Training Programme being carried out by FAO and sponsored by UNEP under the Montreal Protocol’s Multilateral Fund, will also encourage the final validation of several promising alternatives to replace MeBr as soil fumigant. This will help developing countries to meet the MeBr phase-out requirements under the Montreal Protocol. FAO / UNEP would also like to acknowledge and appreciate the contributions kindly given by several specialists from various countries from all over the world, which made possible the preparation of this global report. This publication was prepared by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and sponsored by the United Nations Environment Programme – Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (UNEP-DTIE), as part of its OzonAction Programme under Montreal Protocol’s Multilateral Fund. Ricardo Labrada FAO, Rome (I) Luca Fornasari Montpellier (F) vi List of Contributors Dr. Mohamed Ammati Turin University Department of Plant Pathology Italy Institut Agronomique et Vétérinaire Hassan II Rabat Dr. Ricardo Labrada Morocco Plant Protection Service Plant Production and Protection Division Dr. Dan O. Chellemi Food and Agriculture Organization of the USDA, ARS U.S. Horticultural United Nations Research2001 South Rock Road, Fort Viale delle Terme di Caracalla Pierce, FL 34945 corresponding author: D.O. Rome 00100 Chellemi Italy Dr. Antonio Bello Dr. Brigitte Nyambo Department of. Agroecology Integrated Crop Management Practitioner Center for Environmental Sciences Village Market-Nairobi CSIC Kenya Madrid Spain Dr. Luiz A. Salles Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation Dr. J. A. López-Pérez Agricultural Research Center for Temperate Department of Agroecology Climate (EMBRAPA - CPACT) Center for Environmental Sciences Pelotas CSIC Brazil Madrid Spain Dr. A. Tateya Japanese Association for Fumigation Dr. L. Díaz-Viruliche Technology Department of Agroecology Tokyo Center for Environmental Sciences Japan CSIC Madrid Spain Dr. J. Tello Department of Plant Production ETSIA University of Almeria Spain Dr. M. L. Gullino DI.VA.P.R.A. vii List of Acronyms CPACT Agricultural Research Center for Temperate Climate of EMBRAPA EMBRAPA Empresa Brasileira de Pesquisa Agropecuaria (Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation) EPAGRI EU European Union DIVAPRA (Italy) ICM Integrated Crop Management FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations IGR Increased Growth Response INTA Instituto Nacional de Tecnologia Agropecuaria (Argentina) IPM Integrated Pest Management KFC ...................spell out on page 75 !!! LPDE Low-Density Polyethylene Film MAPA Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación (Spain) MAFF Ministry of Agriculture, Forests and Fisheries - Japan MBOTC Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee MeBr Methyl Bromide MITC Methyl Isothiocyanate MITI Ministry of International Trade and Industry - Japan NPSSS Negative Pressure Soil Steam Sterilization SINDIFUMO TOT Training of Trainers UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization VIF Virtually Impermeable Film viii CHAPTER I: LATIN AMERICA 1 2 ALTERNATIVES FOR THE REPLACEMENT OF METHYL BROMIDE IN ARGENTINA L. A. Salles*, D. A. Sosa** and A. Valeiro** * EMBRAPA - CPACT, Brazil, ** INTA, Argentina Summary. Strawberry is an economically important crop in Argentina. Cropping of strawberry is variable in the regions of the country. Generally methyl bromide (MeBr) is applied as soil fumigant in the crops. Its use allows to protect the crop from the attack of several soil-borne pests. Several experiences have been carried out aiming at validating already tested alternatives and to adapt