The EU research project aims to compare,
contrast and evaluate the various different techniques, developed by various
European experts, to rank pesticides according to their environmental impact.
The research will be carried out by a consortium of 11 different organisations.
These organisations include those which have already developed such a system and
those which are interested in sharing the experiences and results.
Current methods which will be evaluated include the Pesticide
Eco-rating System developed at the University of Hertfordshire UK, the Pesticide
Yardstick developed at CLM (Centrum voor Landbouw en Milieu) in the Netherlands,
the Agro-indicators System developed at INRA (Institut National de la Recherche
Agronomique) France and the PC Plant Protection system developed at the Danish
Institute for Plant and Soil Science. The results will be published in a report
and a conference will be organised to share the experiences and results with all
interested parties.
|
|
Assessing UK pesticide use
All UK pesticides carry label precautions regarding
safeguards that are necessary to protect humans and the environment. If these
precautions are followed environmental risk is minimised. Nevertheless, the
environmental impact arising from pesticide use is causing widespread concern.
Few control procedures are in place at the farm level to regulate either the
quantities of chemicals applied to the land or the application techniques used.
The need for the agricultural industry to apply best practice is clearly
apparent.
There is substantial information on best practice, guidance
being available in a number of publications. However, its implementation appears
to be slow. One of the reasons for this is that effective environmental
protection is site specific. No two farms are identical; different crops are
grown, various activities undertaken and there will be differences in soil type,
local climate and the presence of features such as surface water, groundwater
and habitats. The information available is rarely sufficient to allow the farmer
to develop a coherent action plan specific to the farm. There is a need for a
decision support system which will help the farming industry distil information
and produce a site specific management plan which will not jeopardise
profitability, balancing implementation costs and environmental benefits.
The University of Hertfordshire is currently developing a
computer-based system to encourage agricultural best practice and a significant
part of the system is dedicated to the use of pesticides. The software uses
performance indices to report to the farmer how current practices compare with
what is perceived to be best practice for that site. The software divides
pesticide use into two main areas: field applications and management issues and
general farm use.
Field applications
The index used is based on three data types. Firstly a scoring system is applied
to the la-bel warnings assigned by Pesticide Safety Directorate. Each warning
has an associated score. The scores for a particular pesticide formulation are
aggregated depending upon the local site and associated risk. Secondly, for each
active ingredient within the formulation a score is derived based upon a range
of parameters which reflect environmental fate and potential for damage. These
parameters include application rate, solubility, vapour pressure and soil
half-life. The measures consider whether: has the harvest interval been complied
with; the maximum dose and/or maximum number of applications have been exceeded;
and, applications have official approval.
The resulting score, known as the eco-rating, is expressed on
a scale of -100 to 0. A score of 0 indicates full compliance and no
environmental impact. Scores between -70 and -100 indicate poor practices, an
undesirable or illegal application. Scores in the range of -40 to -60 may not
necessarily represent unapproved applications but may indicate that an
alternative chemical or an adjustment in practices may be environmentally
beneficial. The user should aim for a score of between -40 and 0.
The figure illustrates how the system behaves for a range of
pesticides. As the software is site specific a hypothetical farm situation has
been used for demonstration purposes. The first four examples relate to
officially approved applications. Examples 5 and 6 show typical eco-ratings for
unapproved pesticides. In example 5, carbetamide does not have approval to treat
corn marigold on oilseed rape. In the last example extreme mis-management is
illustrated. It is highly likely that the pest has been mis-identified and
pirimicarb currently only has approval to treat aphids on potatoes.
These examples demonstrate evaluation of perceived good and
bad practice and the spread of eco-ratings from relatively benign pesticides,
for example fatty acids, to those that may be more environmentally toxic, for
example cyanazine.
Farm management issues
The environmental risks associated with pesticide use
come not only from applications but also from management practices. These
include storage, handling, waste management, application techniques, pollution
prevention activities and machinery calibration. Due to the non-quantitative
nature of the data, a detailed multiple choice questionnaire is used to
determine the performance eco-rating. The questionnaire is divided into
sections, for example, waste management, storage, training, transportation,
protection of field margins and application techniques. Options of both good and
bad practices are scored according to the perceived environmental risk. The
users choices are then assessed and a report produced. A similar methodology has
also been used to assess the farmers use of non-crop pesticides such as
biocides, rodenticides, sheep dips, and plant and seed dressings.
The software does not rate, rank and so compare the
environmental risks associated with one pesticide against another. Nor does it
advise on what products to use. Instead it determines a site specific score
based upon all aspects of pesticide use which reflects environmental risk.
The software will be available from Spring 1998. A variety of
formats including 3.5 inch diskettes, CD ROM and Internet service are currently
being considered.