U.S. seeks to boost production of toxic pesticide

[Guest guest]

U.S. seeks to boost production of toxic pesticide

 

http://www.abqtrib.com/shns/story.cfm?pk=OZONE-03-24-04 & cat=II

 

By JOAN LOWY

Scripps Howard News Service

March 24, 2004

 

- The United States sought permission Wednesday to increase its use of a

pesticide that erodes the earth's ozone layer and is toxic to humans. The

request came during international talks in Montreal.

 

The United States is one of 12 developed nations - including France, Canada

and Japan - that have asked to be exempt from a global ban of the pesticide

methyl bromide, set to begin Jan. 1, 2005.

 

The Bush administration says the United States needs to increase, rather

than decrease, methyl bromide production during the next two years because

some users - particularly California strawberry farmers and Florida tomato

growers - have been unable to find cost-effective alternatives.

 

In 1987, some 180 countries signed the treaty known as the Montreal Protocol

to phase out chlorofluorocarbons, called CFCs, and other ozone-depleting

chemicals, including methyl bromide.

 

The protocol allows governments to apply for exemptions to produce methyl

bromide beyond the phase-out date if there are no technically or

economically feasible alternatives.

 

Claudia McMurray, deputy assistant secretary of state for the environment,

said the United States " has been the leader in this protocol, " achieving or

exceeding methyl bromide reduction goals for much of the past decade.

 

" We're really hitting what I call a bump in the road - a patch where we

can't find the alternatives and bring them on fast enough, " McMurray said.

 

Part of the problem is EPA's " slow process " for approving pesticides,

McMurray said. Also, some alternative pesticides " might be good for the

ozone, " but they pose other environmental problems such as groundwater

contamination, she said.

 

Environmentalists, however, accused the administration of putting politics

ahead of public health. Repeated exposure to methyl bromide can lead to

cancer. And deterioration of the ozone layer, the part of atmosphere that

protects the Earth from ultraviolet radiation, leads to other health

problems.

 

" This is a very clear-cut case of unmitigated corporate greed, " said Jon

Coifman, a spokesman for the Natural Resources Defense Council. " This is not

one of those environmental issues where you are looking hard at a deep trade

off. ... There are large stockpiles (of methyl bromide in the U.S.) and

good, viable alternatives. "

 

While other countries also are seeking exemptions, the United States is

seeking a larger exemption than all the other countries combined,

environmentalists said.

 

Human activity during the last 150 years has increased atmospheric levels of

methyl bromide by 50 percent, according to a study published in the Journal

of Geophysical Research this week.

 

The treaty is credited with slowing the rate of destruction of the ozone

layer and most scientists expect recovery to start within the decade.

Scientists have calculated that implementation of the treaty will result in

20 million fewer cases of skin cancer through 2050, especially among

fair-skinned people in Northern latitudes.

 

Exposure to ultra violet rays also has been shown to cause eye cataracts,

weakened immune systems, reduced plant yields and damage to ocean

ecosystems.

 

The United States has cut use of methyl bromide to 30 percent of 1991

levels, but the administration wants to increase use to 35 percent of those

1991 levels during the next two years and to an unspecified amount after

that. The administration initially proposed increasing use to 39 percent of

previous levels, but lowered their request to 35 percent this week.

 

The Department of Agriculture has spent $146 million during the past decade

on research to develop alternatives to the pesticide, exemption supporters

noted. However, USDA documents indicate the administration has devoted a

share of that money during the past two years to support lobbying for

exemptions, rather than research on alternatives.

 

 

On the Net: www.unep.org

 

 

 

 

----------

----

 

(Contact Joan Lowy at LowyJ(at)SHNS.com. Distributed by Scripps Howard News

Service, http://www.shns.com)

 

 

----------

----

 

 

© The Albuquerque Tribune.

Users of this site are subject

to our User Agreement. Please read it.