Alternatives to Methyl Bromide Sought 

The race is on to find alternatives to the ozone-depleting fumigant, methyl bromide, as the Montreal Protocol—the international agreement governing ozone-depleting chemicals—is likely to announce a global phase-out of use in 1995. This article focuses on the attempts in the US, Israel and the Third World to find replacement forms of pest control that are environmentally acceptable.

The Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) of the Montreal Protocol is due to report in September 1994 on alternatives. With 65 members, the MBTOC is thought to be somewhat unwieldy(1). It is also strongly Northern in orientation and composition (57 members), and largely representative of the private sector—28 members against 23  government. Most members represent entities directly involved with producing or using methyl bromide and/or other chemicals. Only five represent non-governmental organisations (NGOs) (accounting for five of the eight women on the Committee), all from the North.
    Given its composition, MBTOC is not well informed of either the strengths of developing countries (e.g. experience with agriculture that is not methyl bromide‑dependent), or their problems (e.g. near total lack of worker protection).  In an attempt to address this gap, the Pesticides Action Network (PAN) North America and Latin America regional centres sponsored a panel and field trip during the recent (28 February—4 March 1994) meeting of the MBTOC in Santiago, Chile—the first time it has heard views of developing country NGOs. The panel featured three agronomists, PAN participants from Colombia, Peru and Brazil and the director of a sustainable agriculture demonstration centre in Chile. The panellists contributed information about the import and use of methyl bromide in South America and alternatives to many methyl bromide uses. The NGO panel criticised the MBTOC for its lack of developing country representation, a criticism that was met with resistance and hostility from many MBTOC members.

Alternatives in the South
Southern countries use methyl bromide for fumigation for export produce, a practice driven by the requirements of Northern importing governments such as the US, Japan and European Union. In 1995 the Montreal Protocol will announce a global phase-out of methyl bromide, but will allow developing countries an additional 10 years use. Yet ozone depletion is more severe in the Southern hemisphere, and developing nations are particularly vulnerable to the dangers of ultraviolet solar radiation.
    Southern Exposure(2), produced by PAN North America, highlights alternatives to methyl bromide and seeks to inform citizens, NGOs and government officials about the ways to eliminate its use.
    Soil fumigation, the largest use of methyl bromide, can effectively be replaced by methods such as crop rotation, biological controls, plant breeding, or soil sterilisation. Controlled atmospheres (see below) are being investigated in the US and Chile and are proving an effective means of commodity fumigation.

Israel changes its tune on methyl bromide
The Israeli Ministry of the Environment has adopted the recommendations of an expert committee which investigated strategies for the reduction of methyl bromide emissions.
    Israel is a major producer and exporter of methyl bromide and has persistently resisted international action to reduce its use. Israeli farmers and other users applied 3,600 tonnes of methyl bromide in 1992, 99.4% of which was in soil sterilisation. The remainder was for treatment of agricultural produce for export and for pest control in buildings.
    Ironically, Israel is also a leader in developing alternatives to methyl bromide use, such as soil solarization and hermetically sealed post harvest grain storage.
    The committee was established in September 1993 following a meeting between the Israeli Minister for the Environment, Yossi Sarid, and representatives of Greenpeace International and others. A report from the committee presented in February 1994 made the following recommendations:

• alternatives to methyl bromide should be used wherever possible;

• dose rates for methyl bromide use can be reduced, particularly in soil sterilisation and in building fumigation;

• methods for collection, neutralisation and recycling of methyl bromide should be developed;

• research into methods for replacing or reducing methyl bromide should be encouraged;

• users of methyl bromide should be informed and trained to reduce the environmental risk to a minimum;

• legislation to control methyl bromide use should be adopted.

On adopting the recommendations Sarid said that Israel will abide by all agreements and protocols to which it is signatory, and that it will not lag behind the USA in reducing and eliminating the use of methyl bromide(3).

Californian ideas
A task force has been set up by the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) to find alternatives to methyl bromide(4). The US government is committed to phasing out all uses by 2001—California is currently a major user.
    The use of controlled atmospheres (CA) as an alternative for pest control of dried fruit and nuts has been explored by Air Products and Chemicals Inc. CA creates a low oxygen environment that is lethal to pests. Nitrogen is the preferred control agent, as it is inert, abundant, nonflammable and nontoxic. The system uses a polymer fibre membrane as a molecular sieve to separate nitrogen from compressed air. Experiments have shown CA to be effective on Indian meal moth and navel orange worm—although no information is available on fungal pests. Its benefits include feasibility for long term storage, reduced chemical residues, reduced exposure to fumigant chemicals and substantially reduced energy costs over cold storage.
    There is uncertainty about funding for alternative research. The US Department of Agriculture is undergoing reorganisation and there will probably not be sufficient funding for all research needs. (DB,MD)

References
1. Mary O’Brien, Member of MBTOC, PAN  North America Board of Directors, PANUPS, 8 April 1994.
2. Southern Exposure: The Phase-out of Methyl Bromide in Developing Countries, PAN North America Regional Center, February 1994, 35pp.
3. Methyl Bromide in Israel, HaBiosphera 23:4-5, February 1994, pp13-20.
4. Summary of methyl bromide research task force meeting, 16 February 1994.

[This article first appeared in Pesticides News No. 24, June 1994, page 5]