Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 121
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Pioneer started offering uncoated seeds in Canada AFTER the big Honeybee kills.

    Not the case in the U.S. .

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Campbell River, British Columbia Canada
    Posts
    109

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    try a different vendor, where do organic farms get seed because they cannot use coated so it has to be available through someone.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    I do know where to get organic seed.

    That's not what we're discussing really.

    This is about the industrial Ag/Pharma seed that these outfits are using.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Evansville, IN
    Posts
    2,492

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    There are a number of problems with neonics and their use, notably that they are prophylactic, not targeted (which means they get used when there is no problem or a minor one, without being "aimed" at an insect). Along with that they were inadequately tested in Europe, and that inadequate testing was used to justify skipping the usually more stringent testing required for certification in the US.

    Another "surprise" was that the neonics do not break down in soil as was "anticipated" by Bayer. Why any half-way intelligent organic chemist thought a chlorinated compound would break down readily in soil after the disasters with DDT, Endrin, Aldrin, Toxaphene, and all the other "nasty" chlorinated chemicals that persist for centuries is beyond my poor power to comprehend, but we are stuck with neonics. They do degrade readily when exposed to UV radiation, but then so does DDT. UV penetrates fractions of a millimeter into soils, and not at all if there is organic matter on top.

    Neonics are VERY toxic to aquatic life, and since they don't "vanish" in the soil like they were supposed to, every time it rains some leaches out and into the waterways. They also build up to much higher concentrations than expected -- if I remember correctly, more than half of what is applied as seed coating is still there the next spring.

    Dust from the seed coatings and planting equipment spread neonic powder everywhere, and when it settles on blossoms, particularly dandelions which are typically in bloom here when corn is planted, the bees collect neonics with the pollen and take it home with them. Bad mojo.

    Inappropriate applications have killed vast numbers of bees -- spraying neonics while things like sunflowers are in bloom results in highly toxic nectar in short order.

    I had not thought about soil organisms, but if neonics are accumulating in soils, they will be killing of soil insects, which is not a good thing at all. Most agricultural soils are pretty dreadful to start with.

    Very annoying we cannot get oxalic acid certified for use against varroa mites in the US while it is very commonly (and safely) used in Europe, but an un-needed insecticide that wasn't very well tested and has proven to behave quite differently than claimed is certified without serious testing.

    All in all we need a rational examination to see if a "convenience" chemical should be used by the megaton when we don't know all the costs of doing so. After all, it's sold to "enhance stand", not to prevent a defined problem.

    Peter

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,816

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Quote Originally Posted by psfred View Post
    Another "surprise" was that the neonics do not break down in soil as was "anticipated" by Bayer. Why any half-way intelligent organic chemist thought a chlorinated compound would break down readily in soil after the disasters with DDT, Endrin, Aldrin, Toxaphene, and all the other "nasty" chlorinated chemicals that persist for centuries is beyond my poor power to comprehend, but we are stuck with neonics. They do degrade readily when exposed to UV radiation, but then so does DDT. UV penetrates fractions of a millimeter into soils, and not at all if there is organic matter on top.
    Chlorinated compound are broken down by bacteria in the soil through a process called reductive dechlorination. It can be measured in the field and it is a good way to clean up sites that are contaminated with chlorinated compounds. We use it all the time as a remediation measure.

    DDT has a half-life of 22 days to 30 years, depending on what reference you are looking at. The geometric mean of those extremes is 490 days. Using the exponential decay equation, if you start with 100 mg/kg DDT at t=0, you would have 9.5E-05 mg/kg at t = 28 years; so no, the stuff does not lay around for centuries as you claim.

    Where are you getting that neonics do not break down in soil as was "anticipated"? Source please.
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    http://www.ontariobee.com/sites/onta..._appl_Ecol.pdf


    Nabber, you keep asking for the exact same information. You keep getting the reference, yet you don't remember getting it.

    Perhaps it's time you get your own references since you clearly don't bother reading or filing them.

    What the 'pesticide apologists' are doing is deflect, delay, deny.

    Same old, same old.

    Here's a winner:

    Clothianidin 6931 (days) Laboratory Fuquay loamy sand USA Rexrode et al. (2003)

    This one's worse but never referenced:

    Clothianidin Negligible dissipation in 25 months... !!! Field Silty clay loam Saskatchewan Reported in De Cant & Barrett (2010)

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,816

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    http://www.ontariobee.com/sites/onta..._appl_Ecol.pdf


    Nabber, you keep asking for the exact same information. You keep getting the reference, yet you don't remember getting it.

    Perhaps it's time you get your own references since you clearly don't bother reading or filing them.

    Peter said neonics do not break down in soil as was "anticipated". That was what I was questioning. Not that they don't have a range of half lives that typically span 3 orders of magnitude, or more. Anyone who studies / works in contaminant fate and transport knows this, you clearly do not.

    You cherry picked the highest number from a table of values. A frequency - distribution analysis of the data would certainly identify the 6931 days as an outlier, as is the very low values. If you take the geometric mean of the values in your reference you get 61.5 days. That is your starting value and you go from there with risk analysis. You also have to look at organic carbon binding, diffusion, and dispersion as the contamination makes it way to the receptor. You claim to be some kind of scientist, yet you ignore the very basics of scientific analysis.

    There are lots of sources for half-life. I tend to stick with quality references (except for the last 2)

    The National Institute of health (TOXNET Database) -
    Imidacloprid half-lives of 48 and 190 days were determined in experiments with and without vegetation, respectively. A half-life of 34 days was reported for imidacloprid in a field experiment using soil where citrus products are grown extensively.

    USDA -
    Vegetation increased the rate of dissipation of imidacloprid, yielding a range of half-lives from 42 to 129 days.

    State of California -
    Anaerobic half-life 27.1 days; Aerobic half-life 997 days

    Chemical Watch fact sheet -
    soil half-lives have been reported for imidacloprid under various soil conditions ranging from 27-229 days
     

    Heck, there is even a reference from Greenpeace - Imidacloprid is known to have a half-life period in soils of up to 229 days in field studies and 997 days in laboratory studies [11], while clothianidin’s half-life in soils is up to 1,155 days. Their highest value is about 1/6th number that you picked.

    The highest values in all of these references don't come close to the number that you picked (the highest value that can be found on the internet). That is deplorable science on your part.
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    19 years is a long time.

    No dissipation is worse.

    The EPA's own studies found 1/2 life values of well over 6 months, yet they approved clothianidin regardless.

    It's a 'bad' product.
    Last edited by WLC; 07-01-2014 at 11:51 AM.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Rader, Greene County, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    6,070

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Nice work, Nabber86!
    Graham
    USDA Zone 7A Elevation 1400 ft

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Rader, Nabber is being lazy about references again.

    He only had to scroll down the Goulson paper to find the citations that came from EPA scientists themselves.

    This is the crux of the issue: EPA scientists find problems with a pesticide, and it gets approved anyway.

    This was the subject of a recent 'wiki leak' if you recall.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Rader, Greene County, Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    6,070

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    In a perfect world, pesticides would not be necessary. But we live in an imperfect world, and pesticides, including insecticides at times, are necessary.

    And where insecticides are necessary, tradeoffs are made. An imperfect insecticide that causes less non-target damage than a general, poorly targeted insecticide is a GOOD THING.


    Perhaps WLC could identify which insecticides are on his approved list? Any??
    Graham
    USDA Zone 7A Elevation 1400 ft

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,816

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    19 years is a long time.

    No dissipation is worse.

    The EPA's own studies found 1/2 life values of well over 6 months, yet they approved clothianidin regardless.
    You cannot choose the highest possible value that you can find on the internet. The studies yielding the half-life data are bench scale and field studies that look at aerobic and anaerobic conditions as well as photolysis, hydrolysis, and aquatic conditions, amongst a few. Hence the range of reported values.

    The value that you continually select (Rexrode et al. 2003) is 11 years old. It is so old that you cannot even find the original paper on the internet. You can as you have, find many modern references to it. Since we cant find the original paper, we don't know what conditions were being studied to get the number. Without the original paper, the value is worthless. All we know is that it was a laboratory study on the Fuquay loamy sand. (How does one pronounce Fuquay anyway? It sounds somewhat pornographic).


    Half-rates are always reported as a range of values. You don't see me choosing the lowest possible value that I can find. I always report a range. Do you always choose the highest number that you can find for a given parameter? Do you know what a bell-shaped curve is?


    do an analysis that includes:

    • Half-life (γ)
    • Soil sorption (based on foc or Kow)
    • Diffusion Coefficient
    • Dispersion (along the x,y,and z axes)
    • Advection
    • Hank's Law (volatilization)


    Do you know how to work with any of these terms? Let me help you out: http://www.epa.gov/opptintr/exposure/pubs/episuite.htm and get back to me when you figure it out.

    The EPA found 1/2 life values of well over 6 months. Does this mean that you accept this number?

    19 years is a lot shorter period of time than I have been doing this type of analysis.
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,816

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post
    Rader, Nabber is being lazy about references again.

    He only had to scroll down the Goulson paper to find the citations that came from EPA scientists themselves.

    This is the crux of the issue: EPA scientists find problems with a pesticide, and it gets approved anyway.

    This was the subject of a recent 'wiki leak' if you recall.
    Lazy? I just gave you this:

    The National Institute of health (TOXNET Database) - Imidacloprid half-lives of 48 and 190 days were determined in experiments with and without vegetation, respectively. A half-life of 34 days was reported for imidacloprid in a field experiment using soil where citrus products are grown extensively.

    USDA -
    Vegetation increased the rate of dissipation of imidacloprid, yielding a range of half-lives from 42 to 129 days.

    State of California -
    Anaerobic half-life 27.1 days; Aerobic half-life 997 days

    Chemical Watch fact sheet -
    soil half-lives have been reported for imidacloprid under various soil conditions ranging from 27-229 days
     

    Heck, there is even a reference from Greenpeace - Imidacloprid is known to have a half-life period in soils of up to 229 days in field studies and 997 days in laboratory studies [11], while clothianidin’s half-life in soils is up to 1,155 days. Their highest value is about 1/6th number that you picked.
    It is you that is being lazy by picking the highest possible value for half-life that you can find on the internet and not doing any kind of analysis of the data.

    I am not arguing the EPA references. They fit well within the range that I have provided to you.

    wiki leaks are not references

    Why don't you stick to the subject and stop throwing out red herrings? I thought we were talking about chemical transport, not EPA policy and wiki leaks. Nice tactic - context dropping and changing the subject when you get backed up into a corner.
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Stilwell, KS
    Posts
    1,816

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Quote Originally Posted by Rader Sidetrack View Post
    In a perfect world, pesticides would not be necessary. But we live in an imperfect world, and pesticides, including insecticides at times, are necessary.
    Very true and for the record, I am not a proponent of pesticides.

    I do however, have a huge problem with cherry picking data, shoddy analysis (or worse yet, no analyses) of the data, bad science in general, people claiming to be scientists yet continue to demonstrate a poor understanding of the scientific method, sensationalism, hyperbole, and outright lying. Also evasion, drifting, and contest dropping used as a debating technique.

    None of the above is going to solve the problems that we are facing.
    Last edited by Nabber86; 07-01-2014 at 01:16 PM. Reason: evasion
    Honey Badger Don't Care ಠ_ಠ ~=[,,_,,]:3

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Libertytown, MD, USA
    Posts
    134

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Why do some of you people think you don't have a choice? You have choices. What it seems that you want is to force your choice on someone else to supply what you want. Why should Home Depot, Lowe's, or Wal-Mart be forced to offer what you deem acceptable? You can get it elsewhere. If I want fried chicken I go to KFC of Roy Rogers. I don't go to Burger King and harass them about not making what I want more widely available. Better yet, if the market for organic seed is so under-served, why aren't you selling organic seed?

    http://www.motherearthnews.com/organ...m0z11zsto.aspx

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Those were terrible food choices if you're advocating for organic.

    Me, of course I'll eat all of the animal products that were raised on (guess what?) GMO neonic corn, soy, etc. .

    What I'm agreeing with is the NY Times editorial.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Libertytown, MD, USA
    Posts
    134

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Quote Originally Posted by WLC View Post

    How about choice in what kind of seed you buy? With or with out a coat for example.
    This

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Agreed.

    There are currently over 80 million acres of soybean and 90 million acres of corn in production in the U.S. .

    Most of that is clothianidin coated seed.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Libertytown, MD, USA
    Posts
    134

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    I'm not advocating for organic. I'm pointing out that you have choices (apparently, now, they aren't good enough?), and your demand that others supply you with a product you desire infringes on their choice of offering whatever they prefer and expect to provide the most profit. So, again, if it's important, and apparently the choices aren't good enough right now, why aren't you setting up shop and promoting a solution instead of complaining about what others don't want to sell?

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    New York City, NY
    Posts
    4,317

    Default Re: NY Times Editorial: "Risking Another Silent Spring".

    Pardon me for agreeing with a NY Times editorial.

    I like sustainable.

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads