Weather

Ban Modern and High Yield Agriculture? – Is it good?


Biden EPA policies will raise prices and harm crops and the environment, in the name of saving species

Paul Driessen

In just seven decades, America’s conventional (non-organic) farmers have increased corn yields per acre by an astounding 500% – while using less water, fuel, fertilizers and pesticides. deeper – feed millions more. Among the many reasons for this miracle is its ability to control weeds that can steal moisture and nutrients from this vital food, fodder and fuel (ethanol) crop.

Long-lasting herbicides don’t just control weeds. They also promote no-till farming, helping farmers save on costly tractor fuel and avoid soil breakdown – thereby reducing erosion, retaining soil moisture, protecting soil organisms and locking in carbon dioxide in the soil (reducing the risk of “dangerous human-caused climate change,” some say).

In the United States, the second most widely used herbicide after glyphosate (Roundup) is atrazine, which is very important for controlling invasive and difficult-to-kill weeds, impervious to other herbicides. Atrazine is used over 65 million acres of maize, sorghum and sugarcane. That’s the equivalent of Colorado or Oregon, on cropland scattered across a dozen Midwestern states. It is also used on millions of acres of golf courses, lawns, and highways nationwide.

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) periodically reviews the science of atrazine – now including more 7,000 studies over 60 years. It has found that the herbicide is safe for humans, animals and the environment.

But that hasn’t stopped the Center for Biodiversity (CBD), Pesticide Action Network (PAN) and other groups from campaigning to ban atrazine altogether or be managed into oblivion.

Extreme environmentalists also oppose fossil fuels, genetically modified crops, artificial fertilizers and pesticides. But they are silent about dangerous “natural” organic pesticidesincludes many substances that can be lethal to bees and fish – and cadmium and other toxic metals that can escape from solar panels dumped in landfills – despite all the toxic chemicals This can exist in our waterways.

Last year, I explained how activists successfully use sue and settle lawsuits forcing EPA to develop a formal process to assess whether endangered species are “likely to be “affected” by exposure to common pesticides. Ahead of the deadline for completing new court-ordered assessments, the agency was not surprised to find that the majority of species were “likely to be adversely affected” by herbicides and other pesticides.

But it did so using even standard an affected plant or animal species of a species would result in bans on the use of chemicals. EPA is also used hopelessly lacking satellite images, statewide Crop and atrazine data, unrelated laboratory animal toxicity studies, computer modeling and best guesses. The dump/dump exercise has little to do with real-world use, exposure, or risk.

CBD, PAN, and other anti-pesticide groups recently sued the EPA again, in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The EPA used the lawsuit to justify asking the court to order the agency to “review” a 2019 regulation. So now the EPA has proposed that detectable atrazine levels In the United States, aquatic ecosystems should not exceed a staggeringly low average of 3.4 parts per billion (ppb) over a 60-day period.

The EPA calls this a “concentration equivalent level of concern” or CE-LOC. But 3.4 ppb equals 3.4 seconds in 11,500 days – almost 32 years! Atrazine is not a plutonium. It has been used and studied since 1958. To show that 3.4 ppb can wreak havoc on ponds and rivers in the US defies reason and science.

These costumes are not even related to actual field or lake observations and evidence of harm. They are talking about extrapolations, which are mainly supported by covert models, conjecture, and activist pressure. However, the effects on American agriculture are likely to be profound and pervasive.

This focus on protecting aquatic life has been around for two decades or more; it is “inside baseball” in its details and complexity to the point of rolling eyes and making readers fall asleep. The essence is here. Just three years ago, the EPA placed atrazine CE-LOC at 15 ppb, based on a wide range of research and comments by government, academia, industry and activists. Even the US Geological and Agricultural Survey has weighed in. Before that, this was still a reasonable 10 ppb.

In 2016, the EPA proposed but ultimately rejected a 3.4 ppb LOC, after many farmers and scientific groups pointed out the poor quality and unscientific methods the agency used to achieve that. But this June 30 – using a court order that the agency itself requested – the EPA “reassessed” its decision. Organ Dishonest statement it had intended to set that extremely low standard, and made its decision to solicit public opinion, almost as if it were a misdemeanor.

Anticipating the disturbance its proposal would cause, the EPA said it would seek an “external peer review” of the aquatic species risk assessment and decided 3.4 ppb. But this is far from a formal, balanced Scientific Advisory Board undertaking a complete, fair, scientific review, to the true standards set forth by the Pesticides, Drugs, and Drugs Act. Federal Fungicide and Rodenticide (FIFRA).

This 3.4 ppb LOC will result in major limitations to the use of atrazine and/or require farmers to take extensive, costly measures to control runoff – all based on atrazine levels computer-generated estimates, projections, of multi-county or multi-state watersheds where atrazine-based herbicide is used on acreage in locations near that watershed.

Near-zero LOCs lead to an effective ban on the use of atrazine-based herbicides – amid growing international grain shortages, growing hunger, fuel and fertilizer prices increased fertilizer use, intensification mandates the conversion of more corn into ethanol (to replace “non-renewable” gasoline) and other important considerations.

This Biden EPA decision certainly looks like a “major federal action,” representing a “transitional expansion” in the Regulatory body of EPAand raised “key questions” about What specific language in FIFRA gives the EPA such unprecedented power. It seems certain that this 3.4 ppb ordinance defies the legal standards set forth by the US Supreme Court in West Virginia v. EPAregarding the agency’s asserted authority to regulate power plants in the name of climate change – where the court used precisely those cited provisions to overturn the prosecution. EPA rights.

The EPA’s proposed standard would inevitably lead to significant regional and national political, economic, and agricultural consequences. It will no doubt affect a significant portion of the US economy – and infiltrate sectors that are provincial by the US Department of Agriculture and Energy. It would also undermine the EPA’s own climate change prevention and mitigation initiatives.

America’s top environmental agency seems to be telling the Supreme Court, try and stop us again.

The policies of the Biden Administration have made energy horribly expensive (up to $5 a gallon for the regular and $9 in select California cities), creating supply chain crises for infant formula and other consumer staples, and sending inflation soaring 9.1% annuallycompared with 1.5% in January 2021. These policies are battering millions of American families.

The president has just returned from Saudi Arabia, where he begged the king and prince to produce more oil so Team Biden could continue to limit production of the vast US oil resources. This is shameful, demeaning, hypocritical and destructive.

Between widespread famine in Sri Lanka, and even in Germany and EnglandDue to radical green policies, Team Biden seems to think it will cause even more damage – and more prostration to extremists.

As the country worries about the possibility of a recession, will Team Biden really risk another Recession Era Dust Bowl – happening in part due to too much plowing, amid record high temperatures and drought decades before anyone formed fossil fuels – man-made climate crisis driven?

This 3.4 ppb LOC is bad science, bad policy, bad agriculture, bad economics, and bad ethics. Anyone interested in this proposal can submit comments until September 6 at:

https://www.regulation.gov/docket/EPA-HQ-OPP-2013-0266

Paul Driessen is senior policy advisor to the Committee for an Created Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of books, reports and articles on energy, environmental, and gas issues. and human rights.



Source link

news7g

News7g: Update the world's latest breaking news online of the day, breaking news, politics, society today, international mainstream news .Updated news 24/7: Entertainment, Sports...at the World everyday world. Hot news, images, video clips that are updated quickly and reliably

Related Articles

Back to top button